In this section

THE BOROUGH OF NEWBURY

Newbury stands on the River Kennet; the road
leading from London westwards runs through the
northern part of the town. At the present date the
area of the borough is 1,826 acres.

The main lines of the modern town of Newbury
are formed by the three old streets, Cheap Street,
Bartholomew Street (at one time known as West
Street) and Northbrook Street, which take the form
of a Y, cut through near the fork by the River
Kennet. The main thoroughfare, or trunk of the
Y, is Northbrook, which lies to the north of the
river, whence it runs to join the great Bath Road at
right angles in Speenhamland. Although it is lined
with shops and is rapidly being modernized it
presents a fairly picturesque appearance and retains
several old buildings. Of these the house once
occupied by John Winchcombe, the famous Jack of
Newbury, on the west side towards the main road
is wholly modernized, but retains its original late
16th-century north gabled front, which is hidden
from view in a side court. It is of three stories,
each overhanging that below it. The lower part
of the ground story is of modern brick, but its
upper half is of half-timber filled in with narrow
old bricks, some laid horizontally and some herringbone-wise. The facia or sill of the overhanging
first floor is well moulded and enriched with a diaper
pattern and is supported on curved brackets. Below
one of the brackets is a moulded capital to a shaft
attached to one of the uprights; there was doubtless
a row of these formerly. The first-floor wall has
vertical uprights filled in with herring-bone brickwork, and is pierced by an oriel window with moulded
mullions and transom. (fn. 1) The second floor is in the
gabled roof and has a moulded sill and vertical
uprights; a window in the gable has been filled in.
A part of the original pierced barge-board still
remains.

The other noteworthy house on the east side of
Northbrook Street is one of three stories and an attic
built of red brick. The ground floor is used as a
draper's shop and has a modern glass front of the
usual type. The two upper stages are separated by
a cornice of moulded brick, and each is divided into
four bays by pilasters standing on pedestals, those of
the lower stage having capitals of a Doric or Tuscan
type, while the upper pilasters have Ionic capitals, all
in red brick. Over these is a moulded wood cornice
with wood consoles, above which are the two gable
ends of the third floor; these are tile hung and have
moulded barge-boards. The building breaks forward
from the present building line on the south, and on
the return is another double pilaster, from which it
would appear that the south side at least was more
or less like the front originally; a gable end stands
up above the roof of the next house. On the
pendants of the gables is the date 1669. The oak
staircase, which has turned balusters and a heavy
handrail, is original and in a good state of preservation but that the newel heads have
been sawn off. The ground-floor portion has been removed, but the remaining flights go to the top of the house,
where the staircase had a fine painted
ceiling, now closed in by a bath room,
but formerly visible from below; this
has a moulded cornice enriched with
the egg and tongue and moulded ribs
to the panels, in one of which is a
small painted cherub holding a swag of
fruit and flowers. One of the rooms
contains some old plain panelling.

The Presbyterian chapel stands on
the north bank of the river east of
Northbrook Street; it bears the date
1697. It is a square building with a
tiled roof of three hipped gables. There
are two entrances on the south front,
the lobby being below a gallery with
an 18th-century front, which, with all
the seats, faces north towards a 'threedecker' pulpit with a flat canopy; the
pulpit is not of great age, but its door
has some old 17th-century hinges.
There are two disused communion
tables, one dated 1699–1884, and the
other also of 17th-century date. Under
the gallery are some of the original
box pews with raised corner seats for
children. The north window is roundheaded, the others square.

Below the stream, which is crossed
by a modern bridge of one arch, Northbrook Street, continued under the name
of Bridge Street, is soon forked, the
eastern branch being called Cheap Street
and the west Bartholomew Street. At
the junction stand the recently erected
municipal offices. Upon the site stood the market
hall, an 18th-century building of brick with an
open arcade to the ground story. The old gildhall
erected in 1611 (fn. 2) was pulled down in 1828. Adjoining in Cheap Street stand the municipal buildings
erected in 1877, and opposite to them in the middle
of the road is a statue of Queen Victoria. Standing
back at the north-east of the market-place are the old
Cloth Hall and the old Corn Stores.

The old Cloth Hall was erected in the early part
of the 17th century and is now used as a museum;
it was restored in 1829 and again in 1897. It consists of a long, narrow room on the ground floor
50 ft. 2 in. by 11 ft. 7 in. with an entrance lobby and
staircase at one end. The first floor is similarly
arranged, but is wider and overhangs the ground
floor, and above again is an attic running the whole
length of the building. The stairs and other internal
fittings are modern. The north front is divided into
six bays on the ground floor by semicircular wood
pilasters on stone pedestals with moulded bases and
capitals surmounted by carved brackets very much
restored. Immediately above these brackets is a
moulded wood cornice. All the windows have iron
casements in moulded wood frames and mullions, one
or two only being old. The entrance doorway is
flanked by pilasters and brackets similar to those
above described, but the door itself with the coved
porch over is modern. An illustration of the hall
before restoration shows a door in the same position,
but with the pilasters wider apart and with the
cornice breaking out over them. The walls are
plastered and the tiled roof has a gable at each end
and three other gables on the north side for the
attic windows. Over the gable at the west end is a
large wrought-iron vane.

Jack of Newbury's House

Amongst other objects of local interest in the
museum are the old stocks, which stood in the marketplace, and many relics of the Civil War.

To the east of the Cloth Hall Museum are the
Corn Stores, a picturesque long range of low buildings built of brick and two stories in height with a
gabled roof covered with tiles. Along the front at
the first floor level is a covered wood gallery with
two flights of stairs leading up to it from the ground
outside, and from the gallery the various chambers of
the upper floor are entered.

House in Northbrook Street, Newbury

None of the buildings in Cheap Street are of
any age; Kimber's Almshouses are dated 1795 and
St. Mary's Almshouses were rebuilt in 1864. In
this street are also the free library, modern corn
exchange, the chief post office, and many shops;
about a quarter of a mile from the junction of
the fork it crosses the railway by the station,
whence it continues through a number of modern
houses.

In the other branch of the Y, Bartholomew
Street, stands the parish church, the only building
of any interest until the street crosses the railway,
at which point stand the Litten chapel of the old
hospital of St. Bartholomew, now attached to an
hotel and formerly used by the grammar school,
the present St. Bartholomew's Hospital and Raymond's Buildings. The remains of the Litten
chapel consist of a plain rectangular room measuring about 23 ft. by 17 ft. inside; it was shortened
at its east end in modern times, when the Newtown Road was widened under the Newbury and
Speenhamland Improvement Act of 1825 (fn. 3); its
original length was probably about 26 ft. The
chief point of interest in it is its elaborate roof,
which is gabled and in which are two richly carved
and moulded queen-post trusses,
from which the tie-beams have
been removed. The purlins are
moulded and have curved wind
braces. The moulded wall-plates
set back almost on to the outside
face of the walls, suggesting that
the original walls were much thinner and of half-timber work; the
present walls are about 2 ft. 3 in.
thick, being splayed back inside at
the top to the wall-plates. Each
side wall is pierced by two windows, all apparently old but much
restored. The two to the north
are each of two cinquefoiled fourcentred lights under a square head
with sunk spandrels; they have
wood lintels, which appear to be
parts of the former moulded wallplates. The two south windows
are each of two plain four-centred
lights in square heads. In the
south wall is a modern doorway
and in the west another from the
house. The east wall is all modern
and has a six-light window.

During some litigation (fn. 4) with respect to St. Bartholomew's Hospital
or Priory shortly after the Dissolution a witness gave the following account of the buildings then
existing:—

The scyte of the same priorye ys bylded
after an old and auncyent buyldyng and
that there ys a proper lytell churche thereunto adioynyng and that he knowe the
chaunsell there to be seated with carrolles (fn. 5)
and in the chauncell there ys a dore and
a comonwey ledyng into a howse there
stondyng on the south syde and yt ys
buyldyd lyke the sam churche but whether
the sam howse was comonly called the chapter howse thys
deponent knowyth not. . . . there ys on the south syde of
the seyd churche a howse standyng but what hall or chamber ys
therein he knowyth not. Also thys deponent sayth that there
ys a wey owt of the chauncell into the farmhowse which sometyme was close and that in the seyd chauncell there stode an
hygh alter and over the bodye of the churche two chambers
with a chymney in the same wherin one Sir John Magott late
pryor dyd kepe hys howse. And further he sayth that there be
thre dores in the sam churche one southward, one other northward and the thyrd a grett dore at the west end goyng into the
churche-yard (fn. 6) ever accustomed for the processyon to go in and
owt. . . . and vppon the same churche a steple and a fayre
bell therin.

Plan of Cloth Hall

North of the Litten House is the St. Bartholomew's
Hospital erected in 1698, a low range of brick
buildings facing west with wings projecting westwards
at each end and tiled gabled roofs. Over the archway in the middle of the main block are the royal arms
quarterly: (1) England impaling France, (2) Scotland,
(3) Ireland, (4) Hanover. On the back of the almshouses is the date 1839, evidently that of a restoration.
On the opposite side of the road are the Raymond's
Buildings almshouses erected by Alderman Jemmett
of London in 1678. They are of the same plan as
the St. Bartholomew's Almshouses, and are two stories
in height, the lower of red brick, the upper plastered
and having a gabled tiled roof; in the centre is a
modern blue brick porch and on the building are the
arms and crest of the Brewers' Company of London.
After passing St. Bartholomew's Hospital the road
divides and a more modern district is reached, now
served by the parish church of St. John, but branching off the main streets are many courts, known as
'the city,' in some of which are still remains of halftimbered houses chiefly of the 17th century. Most
of the modern extension of the town is to the south.

Roof of the Litten Chapel, Newbury

At West Mills by the river side to the west of the
bridge is a row of two-storied 17th-century cottages of
plastered brick and half-timber with a tiled roof. The
gabled east end is tile hung, and from it projects on
shaped brackets an oriel window with a gabled head
having a moulded barge-board in the apex of which is
a carved pendant.

The castle has entirely disappeared. As late, however, as the year 1626–7 some fragments of masonry
still remained and these furnished materials for repairs
at the church, as the contemporary wardens' accounts
bear witness. There is sufficient evidence that the
castle stood to the south of the Kennet near the
wharf, but the formation of a basin or wet dock has
destroyed all traces of the early fortress. (fn. 7) Newbury
does not appear in the Middle Ages as a walled town
with regular defences and the notices of gates (fn. 8) may
refer to entrances to the common fields or bars where
tolls were levied.

The modern race-course lies about a mile to the
east of the town.

The ground, now covered with houses, which surrounded the three main streets (the letter Y already
referred to) formed the waste and the common fields.
The space between Bartholomew Street and Cheap
Street was mostly in the West Field but partly in the
East Field. The remainder of the West Field lay west
of Bartholomew Street and that of the East Field east
of Cheap Street. The West Field was far the larger of
the two. (fn. 9) Besides these two fields the Wash Common
lay to the south-west of Bartholomew Street, but of
this little is heard till the 16th century. Northcroft
to the north of the Kennet and the west of Northbrook Street was the town meadow. The name
appears in an early 15th-century rent roll. (fn. 10) Another
common pasture was the marsh, now known as Victoria Park, lying to the east of Northbrook Street.
This pasture rose in importance as the northern end
of the town increased. All these lands were inclosed
in 1846 and are now built over.

Manor And Borough

From early times (fn. 11) the site of
Newbury was destined to become a
settlement of traders and wayfarers.
At or near the easy ford over the
Kennet converged even in the Roman
period important roads, the great main ways from
Gloucester and Bath to Silchester, an early track from
the Thames at Streatley, and a very ancient route
running north from Winchester and crossing the
Enborne at Sandleford. To these we may perhaps
add a road passing along from Newbury to Reading
and known (fn. 12) at Aldermaston in 1550 as the Harrow
Way.

Corn Stores, Newbury

Already in the Roman period a settlement grew
up at the ford possibly to the south of the Kennet, as
the cemetery lay close to the present goods station of
the Great Western railway. The position of the
succeeding Saxon settlement cannot be certainly
determined. If we may argue from the customary
procedure of the invaders elsewhere, it was probably
outside the Roman limits. But if this was the case—and there is no direct evidence—extensions soon
followed and the Roman area was resettled. Indeed,
in the latter years of the 11th century, while a part
of Newbury almost certainly still lay to the north of
the Kennet, the greatest extension with the church
and the market-place was to the south, and here
possibly in the anarchy of Stephen's reign a castle
rose to protect or overawe the town.

We possess no direct evidence as to the formation
of the manor and borough of Newbury, and it may
be desirable to enumerate the scattered notices which
connect it with the original and undivided parishes of
Speen and Thatcham and identify the chief portion
of it with the Domesday manor of Ulvritone.
According to Ordericus Vitalis, (fn. 13) who is evidently
citing deeds of which he had personal knowledge,
Bernhard de Neufmarché gave to the religious house
of Aufay in Normandy about 1079 the church of
Speen, with the tithes thereof, 'et pro mutatione
ecclesiarum Burchella et Bruneshopa 20 solidos de
censu Neoburiae.' This certainly suggests that some
small portion of Newbury was then or had been to
the north of the Kennet in the parish of Speen.
About the same time or a little later Ernulf de
Hesding, (fn. 14) 'commanding in stature, supreme in energy
and abounding with wealth,' as the Hyde Chronicles (fn. 15)
describe him, granted to the abbey of St. Pierre de
Préaux the church of St. Nicholas of Newbury with
a tithe of all the revenues from the vill, that is of the
mills, toll and everything tithable, a hide of land and
the priest's house. This grant with other considerations
derived from the mapping out of the Domesday manors
enables us to identify the most important part of
Newbury with the Ulvritone of the Great Survey, a
manor held by Ulward or Wulfward the White, in
the time of the Confessor and in 1086 by Ernulf.
Here at the latter date there were 51 hagae and the
value of the manor had risen from £9 at the time of
the Confessor to £24 when the Survey was taken. (fn. 16)
Behind this financial appreciation must lie the
extension and organization of a trading community
and probably the grant of burghal rights. But besides
Speen and Ulvritone Thatcham probably contributed
to the formation of Newbury, since we read in the
Domesday that 12 hagae existed at Thatcham, farmed
for 55s. As Mr. Horace Round has pointed out in
an earlier volume (fn. 17) of this history, 'unless this royal
manor possessed special trade privileges of which there
is no mention in the Survey, one does not see why
it should possess these houses, unless they were really
situate in Newbury which the formula does not
suggest.' But the result of an ecclesiastical law-suit (fn. 18)
in the early years of the 13th century suggests that
a close connexion existed between Newbury and
Thatcham. In a case tried before papal delegates at
Winchester the abbey of Reading claimed Newbury
Church as a chapelry of Thatcham. It would
seem that from time out of mind Newbury
Church had paid 2s. annually to Thatcham
Church, and on a compromise being arrived at
the abbey of Preaux undertook further to pay to
Reading a yearly rent of 4s. 8d., and this continued at least as late as 1475. It is therefore
possible that part at least of Ulvritone had been
carved like Greenham out of an older and larger
parish of Thatcham than exists to-day. In short,
it is likely that the borough of Newbury was
formed by a settlement of traders on land taken
from two ancient parishes, those of Thatcham
and Speen.

The assessment of the manor of Ulvritone in
the time of the Confessor had been 10 hides,
but by 1086 this had been reduced to 2½.
There was land in 1086 for twelve ploughs, but
on the demesne there existed but one and elsewhere seven ploughs belonging to eleven villeins
and eleven bordars. The two mills were worth
50s. The manor possessed 27 acres of meadow
and sufficient woodland to render twenty-five
swine; but, as already mentioned, the outstanding features were the existence of the 51 hagae
paying 20s. 7d. and the great increase in the
value of the manor between the death of King
Edward and the Great Survey. A trading settlement is a possible explanation.

If Newbury was to a great extent identical
with Ulvritone it soon changed hands. From
Ernulf de Hesding it passed (conjecturally by
the marriage of one of his daughters) (fn. 19) to the
family of Chaworth alias Mundublel. Payne de
Mundublel held Newbury in 1166, (fn. 20) but by 1189
it had fallen to the king. (fn. 21) Then it passed to the
Count of Perche (fn. 22); it was resumed with other
Norman lands by King John in 1205, (fn. 23) and at some
subsequent period granted to the famous Fawkes de
Breaute. (fn. 24) But the Count of Perche apparently resumed his claim to it before his death at the battle of
'Lincoln Fair' in 1217, (fn. 25) as his brother and heir the
Bishop of Chalons afterwards ceded all rights in the
town to William the Marshal and the Earl of Salisbury. (fn. 26)
The manor was confirmed to Salisbury in 1217. (fn. 27)
The borough passed to William the Marshal, (fn. 28) and
soon the manor also passed to
the same family. In 1231
the manor formed part of
the dower of the Countess
of Pembroke, the king's sister,
who had married the second
Earl Marshal. (fn. 29) In 1229 Salisbury received a grant of land
in Newbury of 100s. (fn. 30)

Marshal. Party or and vert a lion gules.

Newbury as part of the
dower of the Countess of
Pembroke passed to her second
husband, Simon de Montfort,
whom she married in 1238.
At his death (1265) it was apparently claimed by
Gilbert the Red, the eighth Earl of Gloucester, as the
grandson of Isabel the sister of the second Earl Marshal. Gloucester was said to hold the borough and
to have gallows and the assize of bread and ale from
the time that the town was in the hands of the Count
of Perche. (fn. 31) In 1274 the king took Newbury into
his hands while the partition among the heirs of
William the Marshal was being made. The most
important representatives of the Marshals—the house
of Mortimer—obtained the manorial rights and the
lands were divided between this family and those of
Hastings (in which the Pembroke title revived),
Bigot, Bohun, Mohun, Vesey,
Zouch and Rupe de Canardi, (fn. 32)
while the houses of Ferrers
and of Salisbury also claimed
an interest in the estate. (fn. 33)
Thus it is not remarkable
that about 1314 Adomar de
Archiaco, one of the representatives of the house of Ferrers,
did not think it worth while
to claim his portion of the
Newbury lands; to wit, onequarter of one-twelfth of the
Newbury Mills. (fn. 34)

The Cloth Hall, Newbury, From The North-West

Mortimer. Barry or and azure a chief or with two pales between as many gyrons azure therein and a scutcheon argent over all.

This great subdivision of
interests continued during the
next hundred years. In 1292
a part of Newbury was included among the queen's
lands, but the value was only about 4 marks. (fn. 35) In
1316 the holders in chief were reported to be Roger
de Mortimer, in whom the manorial rights were
chiefly vested, the Earl of Lancaster, who represented
the house of Salisbury, John de Bury, John de
Segrave and John le Rous. (fn. 36) As, however, later
documents show that other families, such as those of
Hastings, Zouch and Bohun, retained their interest
in the town, the above list is probably not exhaustive.

With the 15th century a tendency appeared
towards the accumulation of lands in fewer hands.
The lands of Hastings and part of those of Zouch
were granted to a certain John Roger. (fn. 37) The possessions of the house of Lancaster were of course
vested in the king; those of Mortimer (i.e., the
manorial rights) passed to the Duke of York and
thence to Edward IV. Precisely how the other
interests were dealt with is not clear; but in 1461
Edward IV bestowed manor, lordship and borough
on his mother, Cecily Duchess of York, (fn. 38) and from
this time till the grant of the second charter of incorporation the town was regarded as a royal appanage.
It was granted to the queen of Henry VII (fn. 39); it was
given in turn to Anne Boleyn and to Jane Seymour (fn. 40);
in 1551 it passed to the Princess Elizabeth, (fn. 41) and was
subsequently granted to Anne of Denmark. (fn. 42) At last
in 1627 the lordship of the town and the manorial
rights were granted to the corporation in return for a
quit-rent payable to the Crown as lord of the manor. (fn. 43)
Of late years the rent was bought by Mr. Richard
Benyon. (fn. 44)

The first impulse towards the development of
Newbury's industrial and commercial life may have
been its position on the roads to London and Winchester. That the place was regarded as of some
strategic importance appears from the siege of the
castle by Stephen in 1153, (fn. 45) the only known event
connected with this fortress. The place was defended
by William the Marshal, and the siege is said to have
occupied some months. (fn. 46) Finally the castle was
taken and presumably dismantled. At any rate, no
more was heard of it as an effective stronghold. The
increasing importance of the town drew on it a
demand to assist the king. In 1189 the Pipe Roll
shows that the burgesses owed £6 18s. 'de dono,' (fn. 47)
which is the earliest intimation that Newbury was
considered as a borough.

On the foundation of Sandleford Priory by
Geoffrey Count of Perche, about 1200, an annuity of
13 marks from the mills of Newbury was allocated
for the support of that house. (fn. 48) The Count of
Perche, however, shortly after this date forfeited his
possessions in England as a Norman, and an account
of his lands made about 1204 shows that Newbury
was in a very prosperous condition. The total
receipts from the town were £52 2s. 8½d., which
was a considerable sum at that date. They included
£20 0s. 6½d. from rents of assize and burgage rents,
£1 6s. 8d. from a fulling-mill (indicative of a cloth
industry at this early date), £16 from the mill and
£8 from the market. The most interesting item,
however, with regard to the constitutional history of
the town is £1 10s. from the serjeants (servientes)
for having or electing their own bailiffs. (fn. 49) These
serjeants may have been the reeve and good men of
the town whose names are entered in the margin of
the account. This was a period of expansion of borough
rights, and the right of election of the bailiffs implied
probably a borough court, which would be a distinct
advance in the autonomy of the town.

Possibly the growth of self-government may have
been assisted by the establishment of St. Bartholomew's Hospital. The hospital consisted originally of
a warden, popularly styled prior, and a number of
poor brothers and sisters. The date of its foundation
is unknown, but as the yearly fair of St. Bartholomew—afterwards so great a feature in the life of the town—was granted to it in 1215 (fn. 50) it must have been a
well-established institution by that date. Its possessions in Newbury increased steadily during the next
two hundred years. In the early 14th century and
later the appointment of the prior was certainly in
the hands of the town, (fn. 51) and if this was the case
at an earlier time the hospital may perhaps have
formed a centre round which communal feeling
could gather. The fact of the existence of the
custom, only recently dropped, of choosing a 'Mayor
of Bartlemas' (fn. 52) may lend some confirmation to this
opinion.

During the early part of the 13th century commerce and craftsmanship probably increased in Newbury. The establishment of St. Bartholomew's Fair
implied a growth of trade. In 1228 the men of
Andover obtained a grant of liberties in the Newbury
markets. (fn. 53) There was a small settlement of Jews in
the town, probably under the protection of the
Countess of Pembroke, (fn. 54) who were expelled in 1244, (fn. 55)
and some trade in wool must have been carried on,
since complaint is made in the Hundred Roll that
during the war with Flanders Newbury merchants
had sent wool abroad from Southampton and Portsmouth without licence. (fn. 56)

It seems doubtful, however, if Newbury's progress
lasted throughout the 13th century. The town's
connexion with Simon de Montfort may have been
injurious to it, or the rivalry of Reading (fn. 57) may have
been too strong. At the partition of Newbury among
the Marshal heirs in 1275 it was extended at no
more than £60, (fn. 58) the amount of its farm seventy
years earlier; and it is noteworthy that certain mills,
usually the most valuable property in the town, were
assessed in 1297 at only 2s., as being 'ruinous and
broken.' (fn. 59) Certainly the development of the borough
of Newbury seems to have been checked. In the
Hundred Roll (fn. 60) it was definitely mentioned as a
borough (fn. 61); it sent two members to Parliament in
1275, and also sent three representatives to attend
the Council of Westminster in 1337. (fn. 62) But it had
no representatives in the Model Parliament. In the
inquisition of 1316 it was stated that there were only
three boroughs in Berkshire—Reading, Wallingford
and Windsor. (fn. 63) Still more striking was the fact that
when in 1333 a tax of one-tenth was laid on boroughs
and of one-fifteenth on 'vills' Newbury was only
reckoned as a 'vill' and paid less accordingly. (fn. 64)

This decline in Newbury's importance suggests that
the town's great source of wealth, the cloth trade, was
still undeveloped, or perhaps had decayed to revive
again later. Certainly the agricultural aspect of the
town was the most prominent. In the Inquisitiones
Nonarum the value of the ninth sheaf, fleece and
lamb was given at £10, and forty-four men paid the
tithe of hay, which formed a large part of the revenues
of the church; but there was no mention of men
'living by merchandise' or otherwise than by agriculture. (fn. 65) Moreover, the Subsidy Rolls suggest a
definite fall both in wealth and in population. In
1327–8 the tax of one-twentieth was paid by seventynine persons and produced £23 2s. 7½d. (fn. 66); five years
later a tax of one-fifteenth was paid by only seventy
persons and yielded no more than £23 13s. 10d. (fn. 67)
The Black Death, too, probably inflicted great loss on
Newbury; there is a signal instance of it in the case
of a tanning-mill, one-third of which was worth 10s.
in 1304, whereas in 1350 the whole mill was said to
be worth nothing, because of the pestilence. (fn. 68)

Newbury, however, recovered fairly quickly. The
cloth trade again revived; in 1355 twelve Newbury
clothiers paid ulnage on sixty-seven and three-quarter
cloths. (fn. 69) As in the cases of other towns at this period,
an increase of prosperity apparently led to an increase in the number of large mediate landholders.
There are several instances about this period of townsmen in Newbury who had accumulated considerable
quantities of land, held in small parcels of different
lords. Thus in 1377 a certain William held lands of
Pembroke, Zouch, the Earl of March, the Prior of
Sandleford and one or two other lords. (fn. 70) William
de Warmington held lands, which he afterwards
granted to a chantry, of the lords of Cantelupe,
Valence and Zouch, (fn. 71) and Richard Abberbury gave
to Donnington Chapel, among other endowments,
four messuages in Newbury held of four different
lords. (fn. 72)

Possibly this increase in prosperity may account for
the fact that Newbury took little part in the social
and religious movements in the reign of Richard II.
Berkshire was a Lollard county and was affected by
the rising of 1381; but the only hint of any connexion which Newbury might have had with public
difficulties is the order for the arrest in 1402 of six
Newbury men, who were to be brought before the
Council. (fn. 73)

On the whole it seems as if the prosperity of
Newbury was unchecked during the 15th century.
There was possibly a slight fall in the value of land
between 1377 and 1440, (fn. 74) but despite this the
Ministers' Accounts for 1440 and subsequently suggest
a growing community. Names of craftsmen frequently
occur, such as John Benet, fuller, and Nicholas Spence,
weaver, (fn. 75) while in 1441 there is mention of a kerseyweaver. (fn. 76) The town maintained a physician, too—John Baudewyn, 'leche,' who paid half a pound
of pepper for a tenement on the east side of West
Street (fn. 77); while the Patent Rolls show Newbury
chapmen trading with London merchants. (fn. 78)

Such an increase in trade probably implied an
increase in population. On the Pembroke lands
alone, which were valued at about £4, there were
over sixty tenants in 1440 (fn. 79); on the lands of Zouch
the rental was probably higher and there was presumably a corresponding number of tenants; and
besides these were the persons living on the lands of
Mortimer. Obviously the population must have
increased in the hundred years which had passed since
1333, when in the whole town seventy persons only
paid the tax of one-fifteenth.

The market-place, the bridge and Northbrook
Street apparently constituted the business centre of
the town. On the bridge were the 'shoppes,' long
noticed as a special item in the town accounts. In
the market-place were stallages and shambles, (fn. 80) and
vacant plots of ground, for which a high rent was
paid on market and fair days. (fn. 81) All these various
fragments of land were usually held by lease for various
periods, for life, for forty years, for a hundred years. (fn. 82)

The Wars of the Roses seem to have affected Newbury but little, though the Duke of York's interest in
the town necessarily involved it in the struggle. The
Earl of Wiltshire took it in 1460 and hanged numerous Yorkists. (fn. 83) Like the rest of England Newbury
revolted against Richard III; the town formed one
of the gathering places in Buckingham's rising, (fn. 84) but
no political disturbances checked the development of
the great clothing industry.

The revival of this industry was perhaps stimulated
by the existence of a little colony of aliens in the
town in the middle of the 15th century. (fn. 85) The cloth
trade reached its height fifty years later, in the days
of the great clothier, Jack of Newbury, or John
Winchcombe, alias Smallwood. Winchcombe seems
in a lesser degree to have excited the same kind of
interest which attaches to Dick Whittington. Nearly
a hundred years after his death he was the hero of a
romance by Thomas Deloney, entitled 'The Pleasant
History of John Winchcombe.' This narrative,
besides giving a long description of Jack's early life
and his two marriages, contains many curious details
concerning his business and the customs of the town.
Winchcombe is said to have had two hundred looms
worked by two hundred men, each with a boy making
quills; he employed a hundred women in carding
who sang as they worked; two hundred maidens
were employed in spinning 'in peticoats of stammel
red and milke-white kerchers on their head,' with
white smock sleeves tied with silk at the wrist. Elsewhere there were eighty children of poor men picking
wool and receiving a penny each day and their food.
There were also fifty shearmen and eighty 'rowers,'
and forty men in the dye-house dyeing the cloth with
madder and woad.

There is a long account of Jack Winchcombe's
entertainment of the king, when his house floor was
covered with broad cloth 'of azure colour,' and of
his remonstrances against the suspension of the cloth
trade during the war with France in the earlier years
of the reign of Henry VIII. (fn. 86)

Making all allowances for exaggeration and romance,
Winchcombe must obviously have been a man of
importance. A part of his house still standing on
the east side of Northbrook Street has been described
above. His factory presumably extended backward
to the Marsh. His business descended to his son,
another John Winchcombe, who with other Newbury
clothiers had enough influence to secure the suspension of the statute (fn. 87) regulating the making of
cloths till the whole subject had been investigated. (fn. 88)
Kerseys were the Winchcombe specialty. In 1539
Thomas Cromwell ordered a thousand pieces of cloth
from John Winchcombe, (fn. 89) and in 1544 it was declared
that Winchcombe kerseys would make 'great heaps
of money' at Antwerp. (fn. 90)

The Winchcombes, however, by no means had a
monopoly of Newbury cloth-making. Another great
clothing family was that of Dolman. Thomas
Dolman, reputed to have been a foreman to Jack of
Newbury, was an ancestor of the owners of Shaw
House, and his fame stood almost as high as that of
Winchcombe himself. (fn. 91)

Other great kersey makers were Philip Kystell,
Humphrey Holmes and William Blandy. (fn. 92) If the
Weavers' Guild was really founded in the reign of
Henry VIII, as has been suggested, it came into
existence at a time when the cloth trade in Newbury
was at its zenith.

The increase of this industry must have affected
the social life of the town. Its character was changing
from that of an agricultural to that of a manufacturing
centre. The first payment of the first subsidy of
1524 (fn. 93) shows between 350 and 400 persons paying;
in rather less than 200 cases details are decipherable.
In these cases over 100 paid on account of their
wages, over seventy on account of their goods
(personalty), but less than thirty on account of their
land. So small a proportion suggests both that agriculture was declining and that land was again falling
into the hands of a few.

Certainly the number of payments imply that the
town was growing; the rentals and taxing rolls of
the 16th and 17th centuries showed a tendency to
describe Speenhamland as part of Newbury. (fn. 94) Moreover, within the real boundaries of the town itself
inclosures of fragments of land and buildings thereon
were increasing. (fn. 95) A rental of Crown lands in 1609
shows twenty-five persons paying rent for 'intrusiones'
in Cheap Street, seventeen in Northbrook Street and
six in Bartholomew Street. These 'intrusiones,'
such as 'le shoppe,' 'le porche,' 'le rayles,' 'le
pentyse,' were usually of small size (fn. 96) (e.g., 12 ft. by
4 ft. or 16 ft. by 2 ft.).

Owing to the dispersion and destruction of the
early municipal archives of Newbury it is difficult to
give a coherent account of the government of the
town before the 16th century, but certain facts
stand out clearly. There were bailiffs from the reign
of John, if not before; there was a reeve or portreeve
(prepositus porte ville), (fn. 97) who is sometimes reckoned (fn. 98)
as one of the bailiffs; there was a commonalty (fn. 99)
(communitas) led by these bailiffs and taking common
action, as, for example, in the appointing of the
warden of St. Bartholomew's Hospital. Whether
the governing body was practically identical with the
chief men of the merchant gild, acting in conjunction
with the lord's officers, is not certain, but a merchant
gild existed in the town, and, although through loss
of Court Rolls we only hear of it eo nomine in the reign (fn. 100)
of Henry VIII, it probably originated at a much
earlier date. On the side of the lord there was
the seneschal or steward. The communal life was
centred in the Moothall, where was kept the weighing
beam for the cloth and wool of stranger merchants.
Here, too, may have been held the courts, the solemn
half-yearly leets with view of frankpledge and somewhat under a score of intermediate courts of portmote.
In 1450, when Geoffrey Bridde as bailiff and Thomas
Hosier as reeve rendered their account, (fn. 101) the steward
presided at both the leet and portmote. The perquisites of the two leets came to 79s. 3d., and his
expenses were 19½d. Only one-third of the issues
of the eighteen portmotes is returned in the borough
accounts, and this amounted to 3s. 8d., but one-third
of the necessary expenses of the steward was as much
as 13d. The bailiff's fee was half a mark. In the
15th-century accounts which have survived we also
hear of four men keeping the 'fines ville ibidem
tempore nundinarum.' Apparently these were the
gatesmen of the fairs, and their expenses were 12d.,
no exorbitant sum.

The appointment of the reeve may have been in
the lord's hands; that of the bailiff lay in the hands
of the court leet jury in conjunction with the lord's
steward, if the account given in a Court Roll in the
reign of Henry VIII represents the state of affairs
during the previous century. (fn. 102) According to this
document Newbury was divided into six tithings,
two for each of the principal streets, with a tithingman at the head of each; their presentments were
confirmed by a jury of twelve men. This jury, in
conjunction with the seneschal or steward, chose the
town officers. The jury chose four constables, out of
whom the seneschal selected two; four bailiffs, from
whom the seneschal chose two; twelve tithing-men,
from whom the seneschal chose six, and six gatewards, from whom the seneschal chose three. (fn. 103)

The jurisdiction of the court leet extended as usual
over matters of public health, industry and trade.
Men were presented for obstructing the roads and
placing garbage on the highway. There were the
usual presentments of bakers and brewers. The
common baker, who baked bad bread, and the
common miller, who took too much toll (both fined
6d.), are ordinary figures in the manor courts. Less
usual perhaps is the common 'candelator' presented
for making candles 'insufficiently.'

It was, however, unlikely that a growing community could continue to live, even if it had hitherto
lived, simply under the organization of a manor.
The growth of capitalism in Newbury probably
implied the growth of a class able and desirous of
managing the affairs of the town. Their position
may well have been strengthened by the dissolution
of the religious houses and the destruction of the
chantries, which increased the wealth both of the
town itself and of individual townsmen.

On the whole, Newbury seems to have been fortunate in the distribution of its church lands; some part
of them did, indeed, fall into the hands of private
owners, such as John Knight, himself a Newbury
man. To him and to Richard Bridges were granted
the lands belonging to the Crutched Friars at Donnington (fn. 104) and to the foundation at Wherwell, (fn. 105) as
well as certain chantry lands. The lands belonging
to Bullock's chantry passed to one Thomas Adams, (fn. 106)
but those belonging to Wormestall's chantry and to
the 'Lady Priest's chantry' continued to be, as they
already were, the endowment of the town school. (fn. 107)

The most important of the religious foundations
in Newbury—the hospital—was not destroyed at the
Reformation (fn. 108); it had been granted in 1555 by the
last master and the brethren for sixty-one years to
the clothier, Philip Kystell. Five or six other
persons were associated with him in the government
of the hospital. They or persons called the 'Masters
of Newbury' were said to receive from two proctors
chosen by the townsfolk a yearly account of the
hospital revenues. (fn. 109) The administration was said to
be unsatisfactory. In 1575 the hospital was reported
to be worth £23 a year and only to give four poor
men 20s. a year each. (fn. 110) These four men were presumably the occupants of the four almshouses into
which the hospital had been by this time converted. (fn. 111)
Despite complaints, however, the power of the town
over the hospital was confirmed in 1599 shortly after
Newbury's incorporation. (fn. 112) It is noticeable that all
through the earlier history of Newbury acts concerning St. Bartholomew's Hospital were exercised by
the 'commonalty' (fn. 113) or were in some way connected
with the government of the town; but there is
nothing to show what the word 'commonalty' implies or in whom the town government was vested.
It seems, however, certain that during the 16th century the government of Newbury was falling into
the hands of a small group of men, some of whom
were probably among the master clothiers of the
town.

Evidence of the concentration of power in a few
hands is obtained from the grant in 1554 of a lease
of the stallage, piccage, tolls and all other profits of
the fairs and markets to Gabriel Cox, Humphrey Cox,
Bartholomew Yate and John More for the use of the
inhabitants of Newbury, (fn. 114) and it is confirmed by the
tenor of the first extant charter of Newbury, that
granted in 1596.

This charter was of a strictly oligarchic character.
The government of the town was to be in the hands
of thirty-one capital burgesses forming the common
council, and including the mayor and six aldermen.
The first mayor, the first aldermen and the remaining twenty-four capital burgesses were named in the
charter. The mayor was to be elected annually, the
other burgesses were to retain their offices for life.
The first mayor was Bartholomew Yate; the first six
aldermen were: Edward Holmes, Roger Sanderson,
Henry Coxe, Gabriel Coxe, John Kystell and William
Barkesdale. The list of the common council includes
the names of at least four persons who were probably
related to individual aldermen, increasing the impression that the government of the town was in the
hands of a clique. There is absolutely no trace of
popular election. The mayor was chosen annually
by the aldermen and common council from among
their own number. Vacancies among the aldermen
and common council were to be filled by the promotion of the senior capital burgess to the vacant
place and the capital burgesses filled up openings in
their own ranks by co-opting fresh members from
outside. Capital burgesses if guilty of misconduct
could be removed by the mayor and aldermen, and
aldermen by the capital burgesses. The 'commonalty'
in any modern sense were quite unrepresented.

The powers of the mayor and the capital burgesses
were considerable. It was their duty to hold a court
of record weekly in the gildhall to decide all pleas
of less than 20 marks in value concerning assaults,
debts, frauds, agreements, seizures of goods within
the town, and so forth; all actions were to be carried
on by four attorneys appointed for life by the corporation. The council was to elect a steward, (fn. 115) who
with the mayor and one alderman chosen by the
burgesses were to act as justices for the execution of
all statutes relating to vagabonds, labourers and
weights and measures. There were to be four yearly
fairs (one of them St. Bartholomew's), of which the
control was to be in the hands of the corporation,
and £3 a year was paid on this account to the
queen. A pie-powder court was established for each
of these fairs. All supervision of trade and industry
belonged to the corporation, and it had powers to
make what ordinances it thought fit. Further, all
liberties, markets and profits belonging to the court
leet, the view of frankpledge, lawdays and exemptions
were to belong as fully to the mayor and the corporation as they had previously done to the inhabitants
however incorporated. (fn. 116)

Whether this last phrase was merely a lawyer's
saving clause or whether there really had been some
previous incorporation is uncertain; at any rate, the
rights possessed by the corporation did not include
the lordship of the manor. They were, however,
sufficiently extensive, and were at once put into operation. In 1597 the corporation issued a lengthy list of
ordinances, the general effect of which was to increase
the power of the mayor and aldermen. (fn. 117) The method
of election of the mayor was to be defined; the outgoing mayor and aldermen were to nominate two
capital burgesses for the office, of whom the burgesses
were to elect one. (fn. 118) No matters could be discussed
and settled without a quorum of burgesses, including
the mayor and two aldermen. (fn. 119) Aldermen and
burgesses betraying counsel were to be removed from
office. (fn. 120) The desire to suppress any popular opposition is obvious. All persons of an inferior sort,
freemen, journeymen and apprentices, were forbidden
to make unlawful assemblies, brotherhoods or congregations. (fn. 121) Anyone rebelling or conspiring against
the corporation or slandering it was to be fined, on
proof of his guilt being made by two witnesses. (fn. 122)
On the other hand, the mayor and corporation could,
when they chose, summon the commonalty to the
gildhall 'for the better government of the borough' (fn. 123);
thus presumably securing a show of popular authority
at critical moments.

The constitutional articles of these ordinances are,
however, less striking than those concerning trade and
industry. The latter are elaborate. There were to
be five companies comprising all the trades in the
borough. These were the companies of clothiers
(i.e., makers of clothes), mercers, tanners, braziers and
clothworkers (i.e., makers of cloth). Any person
engaged in any lawful trade in the borough might be
allotted by the corporation to one or other of these
companies. (fn. 124) The result was that the companies
included an odd assortment of trades. Scriveners and
schoolmasters fell to the clothiers' company, apothecaries and all sorts of provision dealers and innkeepers
were included among the mercers. 'Tanners' comprised barbers and surgeons, and 'braziers' all those
engaged in the building trades. No person was to
use any craft or set up any shop unless he was free of
the company to which his special trade belonged, nor
was he to employ any journeyman or apprentice not
belonging to that company. (fn. 125) The government of
each company was in the hands of a master and two
wardens appointed by the mayor. (fn. 126) The general
regulations for trade were strict: no one was to set
up more than one shop on pain of a fine of £5 (fn. 127);
the number of apprentices was limited—members of
the corporation might take three, other persons two
only (fn. 128); nor was anyone to take an additional apprentice if he could get a freeman or a journeyman to
serve at reasonable rates. (fn. 129) Masters were to present
their apprentices to the mayor and aldermen at the
gildhall, who were to ascertain their conditions of
birth, whether freemen or aliens, and 'the cleanness
of their bodies.' The names of the apprentices were
registered in the town book. (fn. 130) No master was to
pay his apprentice wages after his term was out till
the youth had been presented for one month to some
'honest workman,' appointed by the mayor and
aldermen, who was to decide if the apprentice was fit
for journeywork. (fn. 131) No journeyman could leave his
place on account of disagreement with his master till
the dispute had been laid before the corporation. (fn. 132)
No person could set up a trade unless he had been
apprenticed to it, or had exercised it for ten years
before the issue of the ordinances, or unless he was
one of the corporation. (fn. 133) The regulations for all
persons concerned in clothmaking were full and
elaborate. The use of the prescribed instruments,
such as teasels instead of iron cards, the making of
cloth with the workman's mark, the completion of
the cloth within the borough, the use of the town
stamp for cloth so made, were among the subjects
included in the ordinances. (fn. 134)

Brewing was the other trade for which there were
special rules; it was confined to the common
brewers. (fn. 135) The general superintendence of trade
and industry in the town was confided to the mayor.
He had the right of entering the house of any craftsman or trader and of examining tools, wares, weights
and measures, to see that the goods were well made,
the tools and the measures lawful. Resistance to his
search involved a fine of £5. (fn. 136) Nor were the ordinances entirely industrial and constitutional. There
were also police regulations; unlawful games, dice,
cards and table were prohibited to the journeymen
and apprentices. Shooting with the long-bow was
enjoined with the view of keeping the youth of the
town 'honestly exercised' during the holidays. (fn. 137)
Work on Sundays was forbidden, and every householder was to see that his journeymen and apprentices
went to hear service at the parish church and took
'lawful exercise' afterwards. (fn. 138) If all these ordinances
were enforced, Newbury must have been a much
administered town; but unfortunately there is no
account of how these rules were observed, though the
companies long remained in existence.

The rule of the corporation does not seem at first
to have been entirely satisfactory, nor were the mayor
and corporation content with the extent of their
powers. In 1605 a dispute arose concerning a
petition by the mayor and twelve others. (fn. 139) Possibly
there had been some attempt to curtail the power of
the corporation, or possibly the mayor and aldermen
objected to so large a common council. At any rate,
in 1605 there was an indignant remonstrance
addressed to the Privy Council against a project said
to be put forth by thirteen inhabitants of Newbury,
most of whom were nearly connected by blood or
marriage. These persons were said to be trying to
obtain further privileges without consulting the other
inhabitants of Newbury. Their ambitions extended
beyond Newbury and embraced the whole bailiwick
of Faircross, which they desired to control. Their
demands were said to comprise the whole profits of
the town and manor now belonging to the king. The
objectors to these demands declared that their concession would involve the ruin of the town, and
especially of the poorer sort who depended on the
clothing trade and on the market, since it was said
that the object of the thirteen was to exclude
'foreigners,' by whose admission the market flourished.

The opposition apparently succeeded, for no
further steps seem to have been taken at this time.
But James I, in the seventeenth year of his reign,
granted the town and manor of Newbury on a
ninety-nine years' lease to five men, Thomas Murray,
Sir Henry Hobart, John Walter, James Fullerton
and Thomas Trevor, who afterwards granted it to
Gabriel Coxe and Hugh Hawkins (each in their turn
Mayor of Newbury). The town interests were not,
however, so far injured as might have been feared,
for a few years later a fresh patent was granted by
Charles I in return for a payment of £500 from the
corporation. By this new patent the reversion of
the whole manor and town was handed over to the
mayor and corporation, to be held in free burgage at
a rent of £25 4s. 2½d. yearly, (fn. 140) and this arrangement,
together with the powers granted by the Elizabethan
charter, formed the permanent constitution of the
town.

This period of constitutional development was also
one of social and economic change. An increasing
number of persons during Elizabeth's reign paid their
subsidy on account of their lands. (fn. 141) This may have
been in part due to the efforts of those paying for
personalty to avoid the burden, but it may also have
been the consequence of the adoption by the Newbury
capitalists of the custom of investing in land rather
than of extending industry. In 1564 many clothiers
were said to be giving up work and causing persons
'to live idly,' perhaps for lack of a market; and the
council desired that they should be seriously admonished and should be commanded to 'occupy.' (fn. 142)
The case of Thomas Dolman, who retired from
business and built the great house at Shaw, may have
been exceptional only from the large scale on which
his trade had been conducted. The well-known
distich,
'Lord have mercy upon us, miserable sinners,
Thomas Dolman has built a new house and turned
away all his spinners,' (fn. 143)
may point to a very real cause of distress.

Possibly, also, the ordinances prohibiting men from
engaging in more than one trade or setting up more
than one shop may have discouraged the industrial
employment of capital.

The Clothweavers' Company, which still exists,
received its patent of incorporation in 1601, (fn. 144) but
it did little to stop the decline in the cloth trade,
which was as marked in Newbury as in the rest
of England. In 1623 the trade was said to have
diminished. (fn. 145) In 1630 the Mayors of Reading and
of Newbury sent up a complaint of the decay of the
manufacture of mingled and coloured cloths, owing
to the order prohibiting their export to Delft and
Emden. The response was a declaration that though
the order could not be withdrawn for reasons of
State, yet the cloths might be sent to all towns where
the merchant adventurers traded, without interference
from that body (fn. 146); whereupon the adventurers promised to take as many dyed and dressed cloths from
Newbury and Reading as formerly. These measures,
however, failed to restore the trade. No number of
regulations succeeded in keeping up the standard of
clothmaking, partly, it was alleged, because of the
introduction of Spanish cloth, which as a new invention came under no rule and was therefore considered
liable to deteriorate. (fn. 147)

The natural result of this decline in Newbury's
chief industry was an increase both in poverty and in
efforts to relieve it. Besides collections from the
poor-box, (fn. 148) there were at this time considerable
funds in Newbury destined to charitable purposes
and placed under the control of the corporation.

The revenue from the lands of St. Bartholomew's
Hospital was devoted to the relief of the poor in
1599, and in 1624 John Kendrick left £4,000, part
of which was to be invested in a house and garden
and part to form a common stock for setting the poor
to work. (fn. 149) The decay of the clothing trade, however,
made the problem of setting the poor to work
increasingly difficult. The distress was great. In
1630, when prices were very high, the corn carts
going from Newbury to Reading were attacked by
the hungry mob. (fn. 150) The Mayor of Newbury declared
that the ringleaders were persons from Speen and
Greenham; and eventually, of persons living in Newbury, only a few old women were punished: but the
event so far alarmed the authorities at Newbury that
a special watch was set to prevent such disturbances. (fn. 151)

The mayor's reports and petitions during the
following years show the difficulty which the burgesses
felt in dealing with the distress. They took the
usual steps towards meeting the shortage of corn by
closing no less than twenty-seven ale-houses. They
punished drunkards and vagabonds, and they raised a
weekly poor-rate. By means of this tax and of
Kendrick's bequest they apprenticed fourteen boys
and girls in six months, and resolved to continue in
this course. They employed sixty persons in the
clothing trade at Kendrick's workhouse, and gave
work in spinning to fifty poor households in the town.
They also clothed 105 poor children. (fn. 152) But clothmaking continued to decay. In 1630 3,586 cloths
were made, but it was prophesied that not half the
number would be produced in 1631. (fn. 153) Hence the
corporation effected little permanent good, and in
1631 the burgesses petitioned to be allowed to take
'another way' for the relief of the poor. (fn. 154) The
other way was unexplained; but in the following
year there was a scheme for purchasing land with
Kendrick's money, and with the profits subsidizing
twelve cloth-workers to keep looms whereby the poor
might be set to work. The cloth thus made was to
be delivered to the workhouse to be made up by the
inhabitants thereof. To this scheme it was objected
that the subsidy would not suffice to enable the
cloth-workers to extend their business, that the
employment of the persons in the workhouse would
throw others out of work, and that if the money was
invested in land it could not be used for manufactures
other than that of cloth, as was now possible. (fn. 155)

These objections seem weighty, yet the corporation
had good cause to desire some better investment for
the funds at its disposal. An account submitted by
the burgesses to the council in 1637 showed that of
the £4,000 left by Kendrick rather over £1,500 had
been expended in purchasing the site of the workhouse, erecting the building and procuring the necessary tools for the making of cloth. £400 worth of
cloth so made remained unsold, £700 had been used
to subsidize three clothiers who employed poor
persons, and over £500 had been lost in trading. (fn. 156)

Other smaller misfortunes also befell Newbury at
this time. The Plague swept the town in 1603. (fn. 157)
Twenty years later a less fatal but exceedingly inconvenient event occurred in the fall of the bridge. (fn. 158)
As the mayor pointed out, it was not only the sole
and direct means of communication between the
northern and southern parts of the town, but its
destruction meant a long detour for persons coming
to the market from the north or west. The mayor
appealed to the council for help in rebuilding the
bridge, declaring that formerly the town would
have received a grant of timber from the trees on the
'Wash,' which was then part of the royal manor of
Newbury, but now there were no trees there. This
was a contrast to the state of things sixty years previously, when in the terrier of 1561 it was stated that
there were 350 timber trees, as well as saplings,
lopped trees and pollards. (fn. 159)

Despite these various mishaps Newbury retained
its position in the county. In 1636 its assessment
for ship-money was £120; this was below that of
Reading, but above that of the other towns in
Berkshire.

A town lying, as Newbury did, close to the direct
road between London and Oxford was certain to
suffer during the Civil War. As is well known, two
sharply-contested battles were fought in its neighbourhood, (fn. 160) and the townsmen suffered severely from
the requisitions of both belligerents.

During the Commonwealth Newbury, like the rest
of England, suffered from the consequences of the
Dutch war. A number of Dutch prisoners were
quartered there, and the mayor was directed to keep
them safely, and to draw their allowance from the
Navy treasurers—6d. a day for each prisoner. (fn. 161)
Unhappily the treasurer did not apparently honour
the mayor's draft, for some months later the mayor,
John Birch, wrote a piteous letter praying that someone would receive his accounts and pay him, and
also that he might be relieved from the support of
the prisoners. (fn. 162) Whether he was repaid anything
seems doubtful; the only reply on record, nearly
two years later, merely states that there is no
sufficient evidence for any expenditure beyond the
State allowance. (fn. 163)

Newbury had to endure another visitation of
Parliamentary soldiers during the Royalist rising of
1654–5, (fn. 164) but otherwise it remained fairly undisturbed till the Restoration. A heavy misfortune
threatened it in 1653, when it was reported that the
market toll had been entered at Worcester House as
a 'discovery of Crown rent. (fn. 165) There was considerable probability of the toll being sold over the heads
of the corporation. (fn. 166) This danger was apparently
averted, but the sufferings of Newbury seem to have
been sufficient to give some ground for the present
local tradition that the town was ruined by the Civil
War.

Another consequence of the war had very inconvenient results as far as the history of the town was
concerned. Gabriel Coxe, the Royalist mayor,
became town clerk, and was displaced for his politics
during the Commonwealth. In a subsequent petition
he accused his successor of carrying off and destroying
the town-books. (fn. 167) If this accusation was true it
accounts for the present dearth of town records,
whence it arises that the part played by the corporation during this troubled period remains obscure.
The records of the court leet are, however, still
extant and are largely quoted by Mr. Money.

These records show that agricultural interests were
still important in Newbury. The election of a
hayward on the marsh, Northcroft, and market-place (fn. 168)
may be simply the survivals of obsolete customs, and
may not imply the continued existence of open land
in the very heart of the town, but the existence
of a strong agricultural element in the community
is implied in such rules as those for the driving of
the common fields and the infliction of fines on
persons grazing more than the lawful number of
sheep there. There are ordinances also for the use
and protection of the commons of Northcroft and the
marsh and for the scouring of Northbrook ditch and
the 'Oulde Streame.' Also the court appointed
officers as of old, such as bailiffs, tithing-men, weighers
of bread and butter and tasters of fish, ale and flesh. (fn. 169)
In 1644 there is a glimpse of the relations between
the court leet and the corporation, when the court
leet demanded that the mayor and burgesses should,
instead of four, appoint six constables in consequence
of the disturbances. (fn. 170) Another ordinance, inspired
by the unsettled state of the country, was that of
1649 regulating the already existing office of bellman.
This functionary was to walk the streets from nine at
night to five in the morning, and to be paid by a
quarterly rate levied on the inhabitants in proportion
to the amount they contributed to the poor-rate;
those who paid ½d. a week to the poor were to pay
1d. a quarter to the bellman, those who paid a
'weekly 1d.' were to pay a quarterly 2d., and so
forth. (fn. 171) It was hoped that he would keep the town
clear of 'all pilfring Rogues and suspitious persons.'

The court leet also punished trade offences, such as
forestalling and selling above the fixed price, and in
1654 it forbade the issue of lead farthings containing less than a farthing's worth of metal. (fn. 172) It had
an eye also to the town morals, and like the corporation it fined fathers and masters who allowed their
children and servants to play in the streets on Sunday. (fn. 173)
If, as seems possible from the case of Gabriel Coxe,
the corporation was disorganized by the political disturbances of the period, the court leet may have been
unusually important.

At first the Restoration seems to have had little
effect in Newbury; a quiet and settled government
was a welcome boon. But, whatever the political
opinions of the citizens might be, their religious
sympathies were strongly with the Puritans. At an
earlier period Anabaptists were reported to increase
fast at Newbury, (fn. 174) but at the time of the Restoration
the most prominent religious body in the town were
the Presbyterians. Dr. Twiss, the moderator of the
Westminster Assembly, was succeeded as rector of
Newbury by Mr. Benjamin Woodbridge, a preacher
of similar views, who had great personal influence. (fn. 175)
For the first year or two after the Restoration he
retained his post, complying so far as to allow his
curate to read the common prayer. (fn. 176) This concession, however, proved insufficient and in 1662 he
was displaced and his place was taken by a Mr. Sayer. (fn. 177)
Woodbridge, however, continued to teach in the neighbourhood of Newbury, and there is a tradition that
Sayer made an ineffectual attempt to prove that he
came within the scope of the Five Mile Act. (fn. 178).

All through the history of Newbury popular
movements centred round ecclesiastical institutions.
In the present instance the indignation aroused by
the dismissal of Woodbridge was enhanced, it was said,
by the repeal of the old Triennial Act, which destroyed
all hopes of Parliamentary redress. Already in 1660
the postmaster, Humphrey Cantillon, who apparently
was a Royalist spy, reported that there was considerable
disaffection in the town, (fn. 179) and in 1664 the discontent
broke out into riot on the question of the election of
a churchwarden. This election, declared Dolman
in reporting the matter, had always been the privilege
of the corporation acting in conjunction with the
minister. (fn. 180) But the populace, hotly opposed to the
rector and 'quite madd since the repeal of the ould
Triennial Act,' claimed the right for themselves.
Under the leadership of William Milton, Thomas
Stockwell and others a large crowd assembled outside
the church and demanded entrance; nor were they
quieted by the information that no one would serve
on the vestry who had not renounced the covenant.
They broke into the vestry, encouraged by one of the
existing churchwardens, and named two men of their
own choice for the office. They were, however,
divided in opinion as to whom they actually wished
to be electors. Some wished electoral rights to belong
to the whole parish, others only wished that the
minister should have no voice in the matter, while a
third section declared that they had a right to displace
the minister. A threat of calling out the train bands
dispersed the crowd for the moment, but their excitement was by no means quieted. The special object
of their hatred was Mr. Sayer, and Dolman attributed the outbreak to the rector's success in inducing
an unusual number of people to become communicants. The feeling was evidently widespread. It is
noteworthy that the account rendered to the government was given by an outsider, Dolman, who
accused the mayor, Cowslade, of being 'forward to
excuse the riot.' Cowslade evidently resented the
interference of Dolman, who as a neighbouring landowner and justice of the peace may have been regarded
with jealousy by the Newbury authorities. Dolman's
distrust of the general feeling of the neighbourhood
appears in his anxiety to get 'an honest grand jury
and a good petty jury' in order that the disturbance
might be 'found a riot.' He was anxious to get
troops from Reading to arrest the ringleaders to
remove them from the town for trial. If the mayor
refused to give them up he proposed to carry them off
by force. The presence of the Reading Horse would,
he declared, ensure a large communion on the following Sunday. The affair, of course, ended in a triumph
for the Royalists, though not without some further
trouble. The leader of the populace, William Milton,
a rigid Presbyterian, was the keeper of a coffee-house
said to be haunted by all the malcontents in the place.
While he was undergoing examination his friends
drew together and attempted a rescue, but Dolman
and his troops 'scoured the streets,' and the mayor,
afraid lest a heavy fine should be laid upon the town, at
last showed himself zealous against the Presbyterians.
Milton and the other leaders were sent up to London;
the new churchwardens were loyalists who would
'oppose this snivelling spiritt of presbytery'; and
Dolman prophesied that the next mayor would be of
the same temper and that the dominion of 'Mr.
Woodbridge and his party' would be at an end. (fn. 181)

The accession of Charles II was followed by the
issue of a new charter to Newbury, which must have
strengthened the Royalist element in the town. Besides an increase in the number of town officers the
chief differences between the charter of Charles II and
that of Elizabeth which it confirms are, first, that by
the later charter all town officers were to take the oath
of allegiance, and second, that no authority should
make any writ of Quo Warranto to any suit for anything done before the issue of this later patent. (fn. 182)

The town, thus secured from any punishment for
past offences, led a fairly peaceful life during the reign
of Charles II. Some uneasiness was felt at the proposed sale of the manor to Lord Craven, who became
high steward of Newbury in 1690, and the townsmen begged to be allowed the first refusal (fn. 183); but,
though the lordship of the manor was not at this time
secured to them, no ill effects seem to have arisen
from this disappointment. One curious disturbance
occurred in 1676, when six burgesses were disfranchised and prohibited from trading; but they
were shortly reinstated and no explanation is given
of the affair. (fn. 184)

The records of the town at this time are chiefly
concerned with the administration of the town
revenues and the regulation of trade. The municipal
funds consisted first of the interest on John Kendrick's
money and second of the farm of the market tolls.
There were also the revenues of certain smaller
charities to administer. In 1675 the interest on
Kendrick's money amounted to £56 and the farm of
the tolls to £150, (fn. 185) but the amount of the latter
varied greatly from year to year.

The administration of the poor law went on as of
old. Money was lent for the apprenticing of poor
children, (fn. 186) vagabonds were sent back to their old
place of abode; but the activity of the corporation
does not seem to have been great either in that direction or any other. It needed a mandate from the
quarter sessions to induce the town to build a prison
in 1683, (fn. 187) and a few years earlier the same authority
directed the inhabitants to keep Cheap Street, Bartholomew Street and Northbrook Street paved and
repaired. A noteworthy point in the order is that
it applies 'as well to those who live backward as those
who live forward. (fn. 188) This presumably refers to the
method of building in vogue at Newbury, whereby
one side of a street contained a double set of houses,
one facing the street, the other behind and communicating with the street only by narrow passages. A
considerable part of Northbrook Street is still built in
this fashion, and it may have some relation to the
continual 'encroachments.'

A description of Newbury at the beginning of the
reign of Charles II suggests that despite misfortune
and disturbances the town retained a considerable
degree both of prosperity and of social gaiety. Its
large market-place and fine church were noted; its
principal industries were, of course, cloth and hats.
The chief advantage accruing to it from its situation
appeared to be that as it was on the road to Oxford
it was well served with sea-fish. The companies
mentioned in the Elizabethan ordinances still continued. 'For the increase of trade' they kept feasts,
especially the companies of clothiers and hatters.
After hearing a sermon, the company would go to
the Globe Inn, with the town music playing before
them; the men went first in their best clothes, and
afterward the women, two and two, 'neatly trimmed
. . . all in steeple-crowned hats.' (fn. 189)

Despite these methods of increasing trade Newbury
probably suffered from the decline in cloth-making,
of which complaints were made in 1674. There
are various Newbury names, such as Barkesdale,
Hoare and Waller, attached to the petition in that
year against the export of raw materials for clothmaking. (fn. 190)

Throughout this period of quiet the defeated
Presbyterians were slowly regaining their ground.
In 1672 Benjamin Woodbridge was licensed to
teach again in Newbury, this time at the town
hall, (fn. 191) and another Presbyterian was allowed to teach
at his own house. (fn. 192) It is curious that in 1676 out
of a population of 3,000 there were said to be only
forty Separatists (fn. 193); it seems hardly possible that more
might not have been found by a stricter reckoning.
There was a small body of Quakers in Newbury;
eighteen were in trouble in 1683 for refusing to take
the oath of allegiance. (fn. 194) Some revival of the hostilities
between the parties of orthodoxy and of dissent seems
to have occurred about 1684. One or two alehouses were closed on the ground that the keepers
had not received the communion according to the
Church of England, and there were several presentments for non-attendance at church. (fn. 195)

The same year saw a petition for the renewal of
the town charter. (fn. 196) This charter was of a kind to
give all possible power to any party which supported
the king's government. By the charter of 1685 the
capital burgesses were to be reduced to twenty-five,
including twelve aldermen and a mayor, the whole
twenty-five making the common council. The
Crown, however, retained power to remove at will
mayor, steward, recorder, alderman or burgesses. (fn. 197)

This royally appointed corporation was somewhat
more active than its predecessors. It modified the
arrangement of the Elizabethan companies, incorporating the tailors with the clothworkers instead of
the clothiers. (fn. 198) It imposed a fine for opening shops
and exacted a quit-rent as for encroachments for shops
having projections over the unpaved footway. (fn. 199) It
also ordained that the assessments of the court leet
should be collected by an officer appointed by the
mayor (fn. 200); in fact, the chief characteristic of the corporation at this period seems to have been a determination to look after revenue; not unnaturally, as it
had been necessary to borrow £100 of Kendrick's
money to pay for the new charter. (fn. 201)

The tenure of office by this particular corporation
was brief. In 1687 James II exercised the power
reserved to him by the new charter to dismiss the
mayor and the whole body of the common council
and to nominate others to fill their places. (fn. 202) The
pretext was the removal by the corporation of St. Jude's
Fair from its old station in the town to the Wash
Common, but it is probable that the king's real
motive was political, especially in the case of a town
said to 'abound with Dissenters.' (fn. 203)

Certainly the alteration was unpopular. After the
Revolution, in accordance with the proclamation in
1688 annulling the surrender of Charles and restoring
the former charters, the old members of the corporation—that is those who were members before the
surrender of the charter in 1684—met and unanimously elected a new mayor, Mr. Burchell, in place
of Thomas Paradise, appointed by James II. (fn. 204) After
this rearrangement the administration of Newbury
continued as under the Elizabethan charter.

The affairs of the town seem, however, to have
been in some confusion. The first corporation
chosen under the charter of James II were charged
with having embezzled a part of Kendrick's money, (fn. 205)
and the amount of the arrears in the corporation
rents in 1689 showed the disturbance caused by
recent events. In the three principal streets out of
eighty-eight persons who were in debt, fifty-three
had not paid for three years, that is, during the
period of Newbury's constitutional disturbances. (fn. 206)
But the confusion seems to have subsided, and a
period of moderate recovery set in. Celia Fiennes
in 1693 comments on the good corn market and
active trade of the town, and speaks of it as famous
for whips, (fn. 207) a manufacture of which there is no other
account.

During the next hundred years there was little
sudden change in the life of Newbury. In 1699 it
petitioned in vain for leave to return members to
Parliament (fn. 208); failing this, Newbury is said to have
exerted great, and by no means always legitimate,
influence in the elections at Bedwyn. (fn. 209)

The town's reputation for the making of textiles
continued till 'the industrial revolution.' It was
especially noted for 'shalloons' (fn. 210); its trade in corn
and malt also continued during the 18th century.
This may have been facilitated by the improvement
of the Kennet in 1714, whereby it was made
navigable to Reading. (fn. 211) Water traffic was the more
important from the difficulty and expense of land communication. Forty years later (1752) the 'Flying
Coach' took twelve hours to get from Newbury to
London, (fn. 212) and about 1808 much of Newbury's traffic
with London was conducted by way of the Kennet
to Reading in barges of 110 tons or thereabouts,
which carried the Newbury produce down the
Thames to the metropolis. (fn. 213)

The additional trade given by this improvement
of the Kennet did not at first seem great. In 1675
the return of the market tolls was £150 (fn. 214) and in
1751 it amounted only to £171. (fn. 215) This lack of
increase, however, may have been due to the growth
of the custom of bringing in corn on other than
market days. In 1751 the corporation decided to
exact the toll on all corn whenever brought in, (fn. 216) and
there is a marked increase of the toll during the next
twenty years; the returns averaged over £200. (fn. 217) In
1791 the toll was again farmed for £208 a year, and
this was increased to £265 in 1801. (fn. 218)

The increase of tolls implied a considerable increase
of trade, as the rate of toll was one quart in every
quarter of the corn, and the importance of the corn
porters in Newbury showed the activity of the trade. (fn. 219)
Trade was further developed by the opening of the
Kennet and Avon Canal. This canal was authorized
in 1794 and finished in 1810. It connected Newbury
and Bath, as Newbury and Reading were already
connected, (fn. 220) and thus enabled Newbury to do a considerable trade in other articles besides corn and
malt. The list of rates for tonnage and wharfage
includes payments for hay, straw, manure, peat, roadmaking and building materials, coal, iron, copper,
lead and timber. (fn. 221) The rise of the barge-building
industry is another indication of the development of
Newbury's commerce, (fn. 222) while most striking of all
was the increase in the cost of Newbury Wharf. In
1723 it was let to the Kennet Navigation Company
at £106 on a ninety-nine years' lease, and it was
calculated that when the lease ran out the annual
value of the wharf had increased to £400. (fn. 223)

Besides the growth of trade in Newbury the most
noteworthy development of the early 18th century
was the increasing attention to education. This
may perhaps have been a result of the strong religious
interest which, as has been shown, marked the end
of the 17th century. Already in 1690 Francis
Coxhead had left a considerable quantity of land to
be used in part for almshouses, in part for education. (fn. 224)
This money was in later years applied to the education of children in private schools. The municipality
also took up the question. In 1706 it was stated in
the book of accounts (fn. 225) that, in consequence of the
ignorance of religion, 'immorality and prophaneness'
were increasing among the young, and though many
persons desired to have their children taught better,
they could not afford the expense. The corporation,
therefore, resolved to appropriate the yearly rent of
the hospital (£40 a year) to the endowment of a
charity school for twenty poor boys. They were to
be clothed, to be taught religion, and to read, write
and to cast accounts. The room called the council
chamber in the hospital was to be appropriated to
the school, and the master was to receive £20 a
year. The details of the commencement of the
school are interesting. The master, Mr. Mason,
was given a guinea that he might go to London to
inform himself of the best way of teaching school.
Fifteen shillings were expended in spelling-books and
6s. 10d. in copy-books. The school was to be known
as Kendrick's School, and the mayor, the justice of
the peace for Newbury and the rector were always
to be three of the five trustees. (fn. 226)

The example of the corporation was followed by
various individuals. In 1715 Richard Cowslade gave
land to educate and clothe ten more boys, who were
known as the 'Blue School.' (fn. 227) Hunt's Charity was
founded in 1727, (fn. 228) and many years later, in 1793,
John Kimber left money for the education, clothing
and apprenticeship of ten more boys. (fn. 229)

This provision for education was the more necessary
as the town seems to have increased in size during
the 18th century. The court leet ordinances for
'haining up' (fn. 230) the East and West Fields and for the
regulation of Northcroft, the Marsh and the Wash
Common show that it retained much of its agricultural character; but the numerous encroachments on
the common lands indicate the growth of building
and a map of 1768 shows that between Newbury
and Speenhamland the houses were continuous. (fn. 231)
In the latter part of the 18th century, however, the
growth was small; the population seems to have increased by only about 500, or a proportion of oneseventh between 1768 and 1801, while the number
of houses had increased by only thirty-five. (fn. 232)

Possibly this slackening of the town's development
was the consequence of the final decadence of clothmaking in Newbury, which resulted from the introduction of machinery. The increase of the poor rate
suggests an increase of poverty. In 1751 the cost of
the administration of the poor law was £727, the
minimum amount reached during the century. In
1759 it had risen to £1,166, in 1767 to £2,128. (fn. 233)
This last increase may have been in part due to an
epidemic of small-pox, of which a hundred and twenty
persons are said to have died out of a population of
3,732. (fn. 234) For the rest of the century the poor rate
on the whole increased; it varied from a little over
£1,600 to a little under £3,000. (fn. 235) In 1798 Newbury, following the example of Speenhamland, adopted
a scale of allowances, which, though lower than the
average in Berkshire (only 1s. per child was allowed),
proved injurious. In 1813 the poor rates amounted to
£5,500, while the population was about five thousand
persons. (fn. 236) This, however, was the largest amount
reached. The peace with France presumably brought
relief to Newbury as to other places.

The cloth trade continued to decrease, in spite of
numerous efforts to revive it; water-power was introduced, (fn. 237) but it did not enable the Newbury clothmakers to hold their own against the manufacturers
of the north. To the early 19th century, however,
belongs the story of the famous Newbury Coat. (fn. 238)
Sir John Throckmorton of Buckland wagered 1,000
guineas that at eight o'clock on the evening of
25 June 1811 he would dine clad in a coat made
from wool still on the backs of sheep at five o'clock
the same morning. By the assistance of Mr. John
Coxeter, the cloth manufacturer of Greenham Mills,
and Mr. James White of Newbury the feat was
accomplished. Wool from two fat Southdown sheep
provided by Sir John Throckmorton was woven into
dyed and dressed cloth by four o'clock in the afternoon. Mr. James White then cut the coat and put
nine of his men on the work of making it up. It
was finished by 6.20 and the wager won with over
an hour and a half to spare. The sheep were killed,
roasted whole and distributed to the populace with
120 gallons of strong beer provided by Mr. Coxeter.

In spite of the diminution in clothmaking industry
revived in Newbury during the early years of the
19th century. Other manufactures sprang up. The
report on Municipal Corporations (1834) spoke of
silk and paper-mills at Newbury, (fn. 239) and in 1830
there were five iron-foundries in the town. (fn. 240) The
corn-mills and malt-mills also continued to flourish.
Trade also increased; Newbury sent away 7,000
tons of grain, flour and malt annually and received
in return timber and groceries from London, iron,
slates and sugar from Bristol. Thirty-four coaches
plied daily along the London road. (fn. 241) The population was rapidly increasing; it had risen from
5,300 to nearly 6,000 between 1821 and 1831 and
the number of houses had increased from 1,132
to 1,330. Rents were high and few houses were
empty. (fn. 242) Another sign of the growing trade was the
revival of the old court of record. This had been
disused for forty years; but it was now again needed
to facilitate the recovery of small debts, and in the
municipal corporation's report it was stated that the
traders of the town desired to extend its authority to
Speen and Greenham. (fn. 243)

The revival of trade brought with it a revival of
public activity. Early in the 19th century the part
of the Bath road running to the north of Newbury
was paved and lighted by a voluntary subscription
from the townspeople. (fn. 244) In 1825 an Act was obtained
which included Speenhamland and which provided
for the watching, paving and lighting of the town.
Commissioners, including the members of the corporation, were appointed for these purposes. They
chose a superintendent and watchmen, and the corporation at the court leet chose two constables and a
tithing-man for each street. (fn. 245)

An increase in luxury accompanied public activity
and commercial prosperity. The Newbury races
were established in 1815, (fn. 246) but they seem to have had
very little effect on the town development. There
were assembly rooms and a theatre at Speenhamland
and various famous inns such as the 'Pelican.'

Despite the energy and prosperity of the townspeople, however, the corporation was involved in
serious difficulties. The market and other tolls had
formed a considerable part of the town revenue, but
as a result of a trial in 1812 the corporation were
forbidden to take toll on turnips, clover seed and other
seeds and roots introduced in modern times, and were
also forbidden to take toll at all except on market
days. The taking of toll under any circumstances
was therefore relinquished by the corporation, (fn. 247) and
the town revenue fell in 1834 to about £111. This
sum was in part made up of the proceeds of the fairs
and in part of the rents paid to the corporation from
the property granted to the town under the charters
of Elizabeth and Charles I. The expenses of the
corporation, on the other hand, including the fee-farm
rent of the manor, the poor rate paid by the corporation for the town property, the land tax and the
salaries of the town officers with other outgoings,
amounted to £142 7s. 2¼d. Further, Newbury was
involved in three Chancery suits concerning the
numerous charities administered by the corporation,
while to the attractive influence of these very charities
was attributed the high poor rate. In addition, the
legal status of the mayor and corporation was doubtful. Up to 1829 the town had been administered
under the charter of Elizabeth; but an informal
election of the mayor led to a trial under a writ of
Quo Warranto. In consequence the constitution of
the town was declared to be that established by the
charter of James II, but the elections continued
according to the Elizabethan arrangements. Altogether the confusion was such as to require a drastic
remedy. (fn. 248)

The Municipal Corporations Act of 1835 revoked
the old charters of Newbury as far as the government
of the town was concerned. In Newbury, as elsewhere, the burgess roll was enlarged to include all
male persons who had occupied a house in the town
and had paid rates for the last three years. The
burgesses under the Act elected a town council consisting of twelve members. The council in their
turn chose four aldermen and a mayor. The noncharitable trusteeships, such as that for paving and
lighting, formerly vested in the corporation, were now
placed in the hands of the town council, which, as
in other towns, controlled the police. The council
could of course levy a rate for the town expenses.
The court of record was continued and its powers
extended. (fn. 249)

This reform of the constitution, though good in
itself, did not extricate the corporation from its
financial difficulties. At the time of the Act Newbury
was practically insolvent. The charities, the main
source of embarrassment, were placed in the hands of
trustees appointed by the chancellor; ultimately various
bodies of trustees were created to deal with the various
funds and in some cases these trustees included representatives of the town council. But a close investigation into the administration of the charities preceded
this arrangement. A considerable fusion of charitable funds was found to have taken place, and though
there was no suspicion of corruption yet the money
had been used for other charitable purposes than those
designed by the testators. The upshot was a general
reconstitution of the misapplied funds, which involved
expenses so great that an order was made in Chancery
for the sale of all property belonging to the corporation. (fn. 250) Happily, however, the borough recovered
speedily, and by 1845 the town accounts showed a
substantial balance in favour of the corporation. (fn. 251)

Meantime other enactments had diminished the
powers of the township. In 1836 the Poor Law
Commissioners incorporated Newbury with seventeen
other parishes into a union area, thus removing the
care of the poor from the jurisdiction of the parish.
Newbury, however, was the head of the union and
was represented by four guardians. (fn. 252) Some years
later another limitation of Newbury's powers occurred
in the abolition of the court of record, the jurisdiction of which was transferred to the county
courts. (fn. 253)

As the powers of the town lessened the prosperity
of the inhabitants seems to have increased. Probably
the Municipal Corporations Act, by abrogating all
commercial restrictions and privileges, facilitated trade.

For the twenty years between 1830 and 1850 the
population increased steadily. In 1851 it was half
as large again as it had been fifty years previously. (fn. 254)
This growing population naturally required more
room, and in 1846 the great inclosures of Newbury
took place. About 214 acres were inclosed in the
East and West Fields, which up to this period still
lay open in their ancient furlongs. (fn. 255) Numerous fresh
roads were made and the lands were allotted to about
thirty-two owners. The largest quantity allotted to
one owner reached about 37 acres, and there were
several allotments of less than an acre. The inclosure
of the East and West Fields was followed by that of
the Wash. This was carried through in 1863 on
the petition of the corporation, who alleged that since
the inclosure of the East and West Fields it had been
impossible to let the Wash either for building or for
agriculture. (fn. 256)

With these inclosures the agricultural life, so long
characteristic of Newbury, began to disappear. The
East and West Fields are now to a large extent
covered with houses and the Great Western railway
runs through the middle of them. It was opened a
little while before the inclosures and a certain portion
of the fields was allotted to it. In 1847 the Berks
and Hants Extension railway was opened which
passed through Newbury, and in 1873 the Winchester,
Didcot and Newbury line was opened. It is possible
that these lines may at first have been injurious to the
trade of Newbury by nullifying the peculiar advantages it derived formerly from its situation on the
Kennet. At any rate, the second half of the 19th
century seems to have been less active and prosperous
than the first. The increase in population between
1851 and 1871 was less than a hundred, and, though
there has been a slight increase since that date, it is
probably due to the inclusion of Speenhamland in
Newbury, which took place in 1878.

This extension of Newbury's boundaries had long
been desired by the town. The building between
borough and hamlet was continuous, the paving and
lighting Act in the reign of George IV had applied
to both Speenhamland and Newbury, (fn. 257) and in the
Municipal Corporations Report the inconvenience of
a divided magisterial jurisdiction for the two localities
had been emphasized. In 1837 there was a proposal
for incorporating Speenhamland and Newbury and
cutting off the Wash Common from the lands of the
latter (fn. 258); but the scheme fell through, and not till 1878
was the incorporation accomplished. By this Act
Newbury retained its old boundaries to the south, but
enlarged them to the north and east by the inclusion
of Speenhamland and of part of the townships of
Wood Speen, Church Speen and Greenham. The
governing body of the enlarged town was to consist
of the mayor, as before, six aldermen instead of four,
and eighteen town councillors, instead of twelve. The
town was to be divided into wards; the North Ward,
to the north of the Kennet and Avon Canal and the
South Ward to the south; each ward was to be
represented by three aldermen and nine councillors.
This extension of the municipal authority of Newbury was accompanied by an extension of its powers;
by the same Act the corporation were enabled to buy
out the gas company and become purveyors of gas to
the borough. (fn. 259)

From this time onward Newbury has lived under
the constitution granted by this Act. The last thirty
years have been neither specially eventful nor specially
active. The great days of Newbury seem over for
the present, but it remains a quietly active and prosperous little community. Its trade continues; the
weekly market is still in existence. A corn exchange
has replaced the old corn market; a cattle market
was built in 1873. (fn. 260) Thus, though the old fairs
(St. Bartholomew's, St. Simon and St. Jude's, the
fair of the Annunciation and St. John the Baptist's
Fair) are falling into disuse, Newbury has by no
means lost its commercial activity.

Churches

The church of ST. NICHOLAS is
a large building consisting of a chancel
32 ft. 10 in. by 23 ft., north and
south chapels, each 21 ft. by 14 ft., north vestry, nave
78 ft. 3 in. by 23 ft. 1 in., north aisle 13 ft. 3 in.
longer than the nave and 21 ft. 10 in. wide, south
aisle 7 ft. 1 in. longer than the nave and 20 ft. 3 in.
wide, north and south porches and a half-inclosed
western tower. These measurements are all internal.

The whole of the building, excepting the modern
vestry, was built at the beginning of the 16th century. John Smallwood alias Winchcombe ('Jack of
Newbury'), the clothier, whose brass is in the tower,
is said by Fuller to have built the church west of the
pulpit to the tower and to have died in 1520. (fn. 261) Where
the pulpit stood then is not certain, but the easternmost pillars of the nave differ in size from the rest and
may have been a year or two earlier than the others.
The tower bears the date 1532 on a corbel, so that
it was probably finished after Smallwood's death by
his son. Evidence of the date, as pointed out by
Mr. Walter Money, (fn. 262) is also supplied by the badges
of the portcullis and pomegranate which appear in
various parts of the church. The former was assumed
in 1485, and the latter was in use from 1509 to
1533, so that between these two years the church
may be assumed to have been rebuilt. Nothing
remains of any earlier structure. Before 1857 the
church had high box pews and the windows were
blocked by wood galleries, constructed in 1710. In
1858 the chapels were opened out into the chancel
by the insertion of the side arches, a new roof was
put over the chancel, the walls were lined with the
present Derbyshire alabaster in shallow trefoiled panels
of stone, and a reredos was erected in place of a classic
altar-piece of 1720. In 1866 the galleries and pews
were removed, the north vestry was enlarged and a new
one built, and some monuments were removed. These
alterations, with much other restoration work, were
carried out at a total cost of about £10,000. (fn. 263) The
reredos of 1858 has recently been replaced by a new
one.

The chancel has an east window of six cinquefoiled lights under a traceried four-centred head, and
two high windows on either side, each of three
similar lights under traceried two-centred heads. In
the south wall are three modern sedilia with trefoiled
and crocketed gables. A four-centred modern archway opens in either side wall to the chapel and organ
chamber respectively. The original low four-centred
chancel arch has been replaced by a modern twocentred arch with shafted jambs. Over the arch are
traces of a former window. A low stone wall between
the responds of the chancel arch separates the chancel
from the nave, and is fitted with low iron gates, made
in 1704 by a local workman; these, after having been
removed to serve as outside gates, have recently been
replaced in their old position.

The vestry at the east end of the north aisle is
modern, but the east window of the north chapel has
been moved eastward with the enlargement; it is of
three cinquefoiled lights under a four-centred arch.
A modern doorway opens from the vestry into the
organ chamber, which has an old side window of three
cinquefoiled lights, below which is a square-headed
modern doorway. Another small modern doorway
opens into the chancel. The west arch, into the aisle,
is modern. It is closed by a stone wall, through
which is a small doorway. The south chapel has two
three-light windows, one in the east and one in the
south wall; breaking the sill of the latter is a modern
square-headed doorway. Its west arch is modern,
like that on the north.

The nave arcades are each of five bays. The second
pier on the north side differs from all the others in
section and has wave-moulded angles and four engaged three-quarter shafts. The others have clusters
of three engaged shafts on the faces towards the nave
and aisles and single shafts on the east and west
faces. The angles between are hollow chamfered
and the bases and capitals are moulded and all more
or less alike in section. The arches are four-centred
and of two moulded orders with a hood mould over.
Above the capitals are small blank shields. The
responds are like the piers, but that at the northwest is buried by the projecting stair-turret of the
tower. The clearstory windows, of which there are
five on either side, are each of three cinquefoiled
lights under four-centred heads.

The north aisle has five side windows, each of four
cinquefoiled ogee-headed lights, under traceried fourcentred heads. The wall below the second and
fourth windows is recessed down to the floor but has
been filled in flush for a heating flue below the
third. The fifth window has a raised sill, below
which is a modern doorway with a four-centred arch
within a square head. About 2 ft. beyond each jamb
inside is a straight joint in the masonry, and between
these the stonework is mostly modern. Probably
these joints show that the wall was recessed below
the window, like the others. The west window of
the aisle is evidently some twenty or thirty years
later, and was probably built with the tower in
1532. Its five lights have plain four-centred heads,
and the arch, which is also four-centred, is filled with
uncusped tracery.

The south aisle has six side windows, which differ
somewhat from those in the opposite aisle, both in
mouldings and tracery, and are evidently of slightly
later date. They are of four cinquefoiled lights with
tracery under four-centred heads. They are also
recessed to the floor, excepting the third with its
heating flue, and the fifth, below which is the south
doorway. This is all of modern stonework and has a
four-centred moulded arch in a square head. The
west window of the aisle is later and resembles that
of the north aisle.

The tower is heavy and of good proportions. It
is of three stages and has octagonal turrets at the
angles, the north-eastern containing the vice to the
bell-chamber. The archway into it from the nave
has moulded jambs and a four-centred arch. The
west doorway has a depressed arch in a square head
with traceried spandrels. Over it is a traceried
window of five lights divided by a transom with
trefoiled heads below and cinquefoiled heads above.
The aisles overlap the sides to the tower for half its,
width. The second stage has a three-light traceried
window in each wall, and the bell-chamber is lighted
on all four sides by pairs of windows of two cinquefoiled
lights under plain traceried heads. Below the embattled parapet is a panelled frieze and the octagonal
corner turrets are topped by tall pointed pinnacles;
there are smaller intermediate pinnacles between
them set diagonally in the parapet.

The walls are faced with ashlar inside and out.
Between the windows of the aisles are buttresses
which appear to have formerly had pinnacles rising
above them. The embattled parapets are all modern.

The porches appear to be contemporary with the
aisles. The northern has an outer doorway with
moulded jambs and four-centred arch under a square
head and the embattled parapet has corner and intermediate pinnacles. The doorway of the south porch,
which is also four-centred and square-headed, has
small jamb shafts with capitals and bases.

The low-pitched roof of the chancel is modern.
The nave roof, which is also low pitched, is mostly
original, and has moulded purlins and ridge-pieces
supported by principals with moulded tie-beams
strengthened by curved braces springing from wall
posts which rest on modern corbels carved with
figures of angels holding shields charged with the
emblems of the Passion; the spandrels of the curved
braces are filled with tracery. At the intersections
of the principal timbers are carved bosses with the
initials I.S., for John Smallwood alias Winchcombe,
and other devices. The aisle roofs contain much old
work, many of the bosses at the intersections being
original, as are also some of the moulded timbers.
The south chapel has a flat wooden ceiling which
appears to be modern.

The octagonal stone font is modern and has
panelled sides. Over it is an elaborate carved wooden
tabernacle suspended from an iron bracket. The
octagonal pulpit of rich Jacobean work, painted black
and gold, inclosing in the panels shields charged with
a star, was presented by Mrs. Margaret Cross in 1607.
The churchwardens' accounts mention the sale of the
old one in the previous year for £15s. 8d., when the
sum of £2 19s. 8d. was 'Pd in chardges bestowed
upon Mrs. Crosse & her children in respect she paid
for the pulpitt in the churche.'

On the north wall of the tower are two brasses,
formerly in one stone, one inscribed to Mr. Hugh
Shepley, sometime rector, who was born at Prescot,
Lancs., in 1526 and died 3 May 1596, the other
bearing a verse inscription to the same, with the
name of his son John, citizen and broderer of
London, appended, and the motto 'Amore Veritate
et Reverentia.'

Further west on a stone slab is the brass of 'Jack
of Newberry,' the builder of the church; below the
figures of a man and woman is the following inscription, 'Off yo charite pray for the soule of John
Smalwode als Wynchcom & Alys hys wyfe which
John dyed the xv day of february a d[o]m[ini] M°ccccc°xix.'
He wears a furred cloak, belt and pouch and his hands
are in prayer; while his wife is in the usual costume
of the date. Below the inscription are the figures of
their two sons and one daughter. At the corners
are circular pieces, two containing the monogram
IS (for John Smallwood) and the other figures of
St. Anne and our Lady.

Next to this is a brass to Francis Trenchard of
Normington, Wiltshire, who died in 1635, leaving a
daughter Elizabeth as his sole issue. Below this is a
brass to George Widley, 'Master of Arts and Minister
of Gods word,' who died in 1641, aged seventy-five
years. There are also many 18th-century and later
monuments and gravestones.

Outside, against the south wall of the chancel
(whence it was removed from the interior), is a large
mural monument with two plain round arches supported by Ionic columns and crowned by a shallow
cornice. Below it is inscribed 'Hic jacet Griffinus
Curteyes Armiger Novē XXX MDLXXXVII.' Under the
front arch is the kneeling figure of a man with a
beard, wearing a ruff, half-armour and a short sword;
under the second are the effigies of three ladies kneeling. Below are six boys and five girls kneeling. Over
the cornice is a shield bearing the arms of Curteys—Ermine a cheveron between three fleurs de lis sable
with the crest an arm erect in mail holding a sword
in the hand. Other brasses and gravestones mentioned
in Ashmole's History and Antiquities of Berkshire have
now disappeared; one was to Henry Wynchcombe,
gentleman, who died in 1562, and Anne his wife.

There is a peal of eight bells, all by James Wells,
1803. The tenor (recast with the rest) was given in
1729. There is also a small undated bell.

The communion plate all dates from the time of
the restoration of the church, when it was remodelled.
The former two cups, two patens, flagon and almsdish
were dated 1732.

The registers previous to 1812 date from 1538:
(i) baptisms, marriages and burials to 1634; (ii) 1634
to 1746; (iii) baptisms and burials 1743 to 1783,
marriages 1746 to 1754 (this and the later books are
indexed); (iv) marriages 1655 to 1659, baptisms 1692
to 1737; (v) marriages and banns 1754 to 1802;
(vi) the same 1765 to 1798; (vii) marriages 1783
to 1799; (viii) baptisms 1783 to 1799 and burials
to 1798; (ix) burials 1798 to 1812; (x) baptisms
and (xi) marriages for the same period.

In the vestry is a portrait of Dr. Twisse, rector
from 1620 to 1646; this is mentioned in the accounts,
the painter, one Richard Jerom, receiving for it
£115s. There are also portraits of Richard Cowslade
and Mrs. Hannah Aldworth, benefactors of the parish,
and a painted wooden figure of a charity school child
of early 18th-century work.

There are also churchwardens' account-books dating
from 1602. In 1643–4 and 5 are many items for
burying soldiers killed in the battles of the time.
The lead from the roofs was evidently all taken for
making bullets, and in 1646 the sum of £42 was
paid for new lead roofs. In 1680 Henry Knight,
bellfounder, was paid £67 for 'casting the 6 bells
into 8.' There are also many items of fees paid to
the ringers for celebrating the coronation days,
victories and other occasions.

The church of ST. JOHN THE EVANGELIST,
situated on the Newtown Road (a continuation of
St. Bartholomew Street), is a modern building of red
brick and stone, consisting of a chancel, north chapel,
nave of four bays and a north aisle. At the west end
are porches and a bellcote with two bells. Some of
the glass in the church is good.

The present Roman Catholic church of St. Joseph
dates from 1864, but there was a mission in the town
before this.

The Nonconformist interest has always been
strong (fn. 264) in Newbury. Until the death of Mr.
Woodbridge in 1684 the Presbyterians and Independents formed one congregation. Till 1697 they
continued to meet beneath the same roof, but formed
separate congregations. In 1697 the Presbyterians
withdrew, and occupied Upper Meeting House near
the river, elsewhere described. This congregation
included some of Newbury's most influential townsmen. At present it is mainly Unitarian in opinion.
The present Congregational church was built in 1822,
but has been since enlarged. As early as 1669, and
probably before, there was a very small Baptist congregation at Newbury, which soon afterwards met at
the old house in Northbrook Street, now belonging to
Mr. George Wintle. A new meeting-house in Northcroft Lane was licensed in 1702. The present Baptist
church dates from 1859.

John Wesley, on his first visit to Newbury,
preached in the parish church, but on a later occasion,
in 1770, both church and meeting-house were closed
to him, and when an attempt was made to hire the
old play-house 'the good mayor (fn. 265) would not suffer
it to be so profaned.' Ultimately a workshop gave
him hospitality. The first Methodist chapel was in
Wharf Road, with an entrance from No. 43 Cheap
Street. The present Wesleyan chapel was built in
1838 and extensively restored in 1898. The Primitive Methodist church was built about 1887, but the
cause in Newbury is more than half a century older.
The Quaker meeting-house has been long discused, but
the burial-ground still exists, and can be reached from
Market Street by way of Mayor's Lane.

Advowson

The church of St. Nicholas, possibly in origin a chapelry of Thatcham,
was granted (fn. 266) by Ernulf de Hesding
to the abbey of St. Pierre de Préaux probably about
1080, with a tithe of all the revenue from the vill—that is, of mills, toll and everything tithable—and
a hide of land and the priest's house free from all rent
due or service. This hide of land was built over as
early as the 14th century, if not before, and was then
known by the name (fn. 267) of 'La Neulond.' Early in
the 13th century the abbey of Reading, on the ground
apparently that Newbury Church was in the parish
of Thatcham, claimed (fn. 268) it as a chapel of Thatcham,
and tried to remove Gervase (fn. 269) the clerk, doubtless
the rector of Newbury. The case was taken into the
ecclesiastical courts, and ultimately decided before the
Abbot and Prior of Waverley and the Prior of Monk
Sherborne, sitting as papal delegates at Winchester.
As a compromise Thatcham Church was to receive
2s. every year from Newbury as before, and the abbey
of Preaux was to pay yearly to Reading 4s. 8d. This
payment was still being made at least as late as 1475.
In the Taxation (fn. 270) of 1291 the value of the church
of Newbury is returned at £13 6s. 8d., the Thatcham
pension as above, and the pension of the Prior of
Preaux at 13s. 4d., but he also drew from temporalities
in Newbury £2 yearly.

Alien houses holding land in England often had an
unquiet tenure, and early in the reign of Edward III
the king's escheator (fn. 271) seized the 'Neulond,' which
had been improved with buildings, on the pretext that
the Abbot or Prior of Aston, attorney of the Abbot
of Preaux, had acquired the hide from Robert de
Ludham, late parson of Newbury, in contravention
of the Statute of Mortmain. The abbot, however,
soon recovered it, as the inquest jury found truly
enough that his predecessors had held it peacefully
time out of mind. Later in the century the difficulties of the aliens thickened upon them, and they
often found it desirable to lease their English possessions to denizens. Thus Preaux granted a life estate
of their English interests to Sir Lewis de Clifford in
the reign of Richard II, and this was passed on in the
next reign to Sir Thomas Erpingham, and finally, on
the suppression of the alien houses, Witham Charterhouse or Priory in Somerset received inter alia the
Berkshire possessions of Preaux and took over Erpingham's interest. (fn. 272) With Witham the advowson of
Newbury Church remained to the Dissolution, though
just before there is evidence of a grant of the advowson and presentation to Sir John Brydges, probably
for one turn (fn. 273) only, as after the Dissolution the
advowson is found vested in the Crown. In 1535
the annual value of Newbury Church is returned (fn. 274)
at £38 16s. 9 ½d. From the Dissolution to the
middle of the 19th century the advowson and rectory
of Newbury were in the gift of the Crown, (fn. 275) except
during the Commonwealth period. In 1655 the incumbent, Mr. Benjamin Woodbridge, was described as
a 'godly able and paineful minister.' The Chancery
Commissioners (fn. 276) at this time, regarding the large
size of the town, recommended that a second church
should be built, and that Speenhamland, parcel of
Speen parish, the chapelry of Sandleford and the
tithing or hamlet of Greenham in Thatcham parish
should be annexed thereto. This plan, however, was
not carried out. By Order in Council of 11 August
1854 the advowson and patronage were transferred
from the Crown to the see of Oxford. The present
ecclesiastical parish of St. John the Evangelist was
created in 1859 from portions of Newbury and
Greenham and the church consecrated in 1860.
The patronage is in the hands of the Bishop of
Oxford.

The most important mediaeval religious foundation
in the town besides the parish church was the hospital
or, as it was popularly styled, the priory of St. Bartholomew, elsewhere described. (fn. 277) The warden or
prior was appointed by the commonalty of Newbury.
The house was richly endowed by the liberality of the
townsmen, and even as early as 1267 had obtained
right of free sepulture. (fn. 278) The chapel of St. Bartholomew seems to have been a great centre of communal piety, and certain aged witnesses deposed (fn. 279) in
1577 'Yt was accustomably vsed in the tymes of the
sayd priors, that the wyfes of the towne of Newberye
should alwayes on the morrow after they were
churched have come to the churche or chapell in the
sayd Relegiouse house, and there did offer certen
Oblationes to St. Leonard, as some of them monye,
others waxe, others Syses and taxe and other kyndes
of oblationes.' In a deed (fn. 280) of 1375 'a house of the
Blessed Mary' is mentioned. It is just possible that
this was the sisters' house attached to St. Bartholomew's Hospital, (fn. 281) and may be identical with the
hospital of St. Mary Magdalen for leprous women
mentioned (fn. 282) in 1232.

The chantries in the parish church were of considerable value. Bullock's chantry was founded (fn. 283)
by Robert Bullock of Newbury about 1330 for a
priest to celebrate at the Lady altar in the parish
church, and endowed with a messuage in Newbury.
By 1535 it had been appropriated (fn. 284) to the rectory,
and was returned as of the clear annual value of
£8 16s. 2d. Slightly different estimates of value are
given by the chantry certificates. (fn. 285) Warmington's
chantry was an augmentation of Bullock's, and founded
about 1367–8 by William de Warmington, chaplain
of the earlier chantry, (fn. 286) and other inhabitants. (fn. 287) In
1535 our Lady's chantry was returned as of the clear
value of £9 10s. 9d. and in 1548 at a little less.
The Lady chapel was in the south chancel aisle.
Wormestall's chantry was founded by will 2 March
1466–7 of Henry Wormestall. (fn. 288) In 1535 it was
returned (fn. 289) of the value of £6 0s. 4d., but in 1548
the estimate is over twice as much. The incumbent
at that time also acted as schoolmaster. There were
also several obits and other anniversary masses founded
for fixed periods, as, for example, that of John Chelry (fn. 290)
in 1438.

Besides the chantries which attracted the notice of
the Edwardian spoilers there were certainly other
foundations, but the dispersal and destruction of the
mediaeval records of Newbury render it impossible
to trace their history. We know, however, from the
evidence of a 15th-century Minister's Account that
there was a gild (fn. 291) (fraternitas) of St. George in the
town which had a chapel of their own, probably in
the old parish church. Amongst their corporate
property were stallages in the market, managed by
their proctors (procuratores), John Okeham and Roger
Carpenter.

Charities

The municipal charities formerly
under the administration of the
corporation consist of:

1. St. Bartholomew's Hospital and Grammar School
Foundation, including the loan charity and school
charity of John Kendrick. (fn. 292) The endowments consist
of the school buildings in Enborne Road erected in
1884 and 6½ a. in hand, houses, shops, cottages,
and land containing 96 a. or thereabouts, producing about £900 a year, also of sums of stock with
the official trustees, producing in annual dividends
£228 0s. 6d. The official trustees also hold a sum
of £2,207 5s. 6d. India 2½ per cent. stock, the dividends of which are accumulating for replacement of
stock sold out for purposes connected with the trust
estate. In pursuance of the schemes regulating this
trust the almshouses and the ancient room or chapel
and an annual sum of £490 12s. are reserved for
eleemosynary purposes and are included under the
next heading.

2. The consolidated municipal charities are regulated by a scheme of the Charity Commissioners of
22 June 1900, and comprise the following charities,
namely:—

(a) St. Bartholomew's Charity:

Endowment, twenty-four almshouses (being ten at
New Court and fourteen at King John's Court), the
'Litten Chapel' and the annual sum of £490 12s.
above referred to.

(b) St. Mary's Hill Almshouses, or The Old
Maids' Almshouses, being six almshouses in Cheap
Street endowed with houses and shops, and about
6 a. of land of the annual rental value of £215, a
rent-charge of £1 6s. issuing out of land at West
Fields given by will of Thomas Houghton, 1627, a
rent-charge of £3 issuing out of land in Northbrook
Street, given by will of Joseph Parsons, 1718, and
sums of stock with the official trustees, producing
£152 8s. in annual dividends. (See also under
Kimber's Almshouses below.)

(c) Raymond's Almshouses erected in or about
1676 by Philip Jemmett, and endowed in 1763 by
his grandson, Jemmett Raymond, consisting of twentytwo almshouses. They are endowed with tithe rentcharges on farms at Kintbury amounting to £274 19s.,
21½ a. at Woodspeen End, let at £55 a year, an
allotment at Wash Common producing £1 a year,
Raymond's cottages and garden ground producing
£55 12s. a year, and £98 1s. 8d., being the dividend
on £3,923 7s. 7d. consols, with the official trustees.

In 1910 the almspeople in connexion with (a)
charity received £404 19s. in respect of weekly
payments, fuel and clothing and £15 6s. 8d. for
St. Thomas's Day gratuities, those in connexion with
(b) charity £84 11s. and those in connexion with
(c) charity £323 3s.

A sum of £50 5s. was also applied in out-pensions
to poor women and £12 14s. 6d. for the services of
a nurse.

The inmates of the almshouses known as King
John's Almshouses are also entitled to the net tolls of
the annual fair of St. Bartholomew.

Kendrick's Morning Prayer Charity, founded by
will, 1624, is regulated by the said scheme of 22 June
1900, the endowments of which consist of two tenements and 23 a. 3r. 5 p., part of Warren Farm,
purchased in 1639 with the original legacy of £250,
also two allotments containing 1 a. 2 r. 36 p. awarded
in 1858 on the inclosure of Wash Common. The
land is let at £20 a year.

A sum of £500 consols is also held by the official
trustees arising from accumulations of income during
abeyance of the charity, producing £12 10s. in annual
dividends, which with the net rents are paid to the
rector for the performance of divine service at 9 a.m.
on the weekdays and 11 a.m. on Sundays, in lieu of
6 a.m. originally prescribed.

Each of the fourteen inmates of King John's Almshouses also receives 17s. a year under the will of
Joseph Hamblin, proved in the P.C.C. 6 May 1828,
and the sum of £17 a year is also paid under the
same will to the rector for reading prayers and the
Litany. These payments are provided out of the
dividends on £1,207 1s. 10d. consols, held by the
official trustees, producing £30 3s. 4d. yearly,
the balance of the income being retained by the
borough accountant for keeping the accounts.

The almshouses founded by will of Thomas Pearce,
proved in 1694, and the charity of Francis Coxedd,
by will dated in 1690, were amalgamated by a scheme
of 5 June 1883, under the provisions of which the old
almshouses were sold and new almshouses for four
inmates erected in Enborne Road, a preference to be
given to decayed weavers.

The endowments now consist of a farm-house and
42½ a. in Boxford, 5 a. in Speen, 2 r. of land at
Newtown Road, 1 r. 12 p. of garden land in Enborne
Road, producing a gross rental of £88 a year; also
£6,366 6s. 7d. consols with the official trustees, producing in annual dividends £159 3s., arising mainly
from the sales of land from time to time.

Each of the four inmates receives 8s. a week, and
the residue of the net income is by the scheme made
applicable as to three-eighths in pensions to poor men
and women, and as to five-eighths for the advancement of education of children attending, or who have
attended, a public elementary school.

The inmates are also entitled to a share or the
charity of Richard Dangerfield. (See also under
Kimber's Almshouses below.)

The almshouses founded by will of Thomas Hunt,
dated in 1727, consist of three tenements situated in
West Mills Lane, occupied by three almswomen,
endowed with a farm called Ashmore Green, in Cold
Ash, containing 68 a., acquired in 1811, under the
Thatcham Inclosure Act, in exchange for land at
Greenham. The farm is let at £56 a year. Each of
the inmates receives 4s. 6d. a week and an allowance
for coals; 10s. a year is also paid for a sermon at
the Independent chapel. (See also under Kimber's
Almshouses below.)

The almshouses founded by will of John Kimber,
proved 16 April 1793, consist of twelve almshouses
abutting on the market-place, endowed with a sum
of £13,342 2s. 7d. consols with the official trustees,
producing £333 11s. yearly, and with an allotment
containing 17 p. in Wash Common, let at 7s. 6d. a
year. The charity is regulated by a scheme of the
Charity Commissioners of 6 December 1907.

In 1910 the sum of £156 was paid as stipends to
the almspeople, being at the minimum rate of 5s. per
week, who also receive in alternate years great-coats
for the men and blue gowns for the women. Each
inmate also receives yearly 2 tons of coal and 120 lop
faggots.

The trustees are also empowered by the scheme to
pay pensions of not less than 5s. weekly to poor
persons, not to exceed five in number, and to engage
a matron to attend on the almspeople in illness, at a
salary not to exceed £50 a year.

The sums of 6d. a week are also paid out of the
income to each of the three inmates of Hunt's Almshouses, the four inmates of Coxedd's Almshouses and
the twelve inmates of the Church Almshouses, and
1s. a week to six inmates of St. Mary's Almshouses,
and 1s. a week to three inmates of Robinson's Almshouses. The last mentioned also receive 120 lop
faggots.

A further sum of £2,000 consols, producing £50
a year, has likewise been set aside with the official
trustees as the educational foundation of the said John
Kimber for the education, clothing and apprenticing
of ten poor boys who now attend the National school.

The church and almshouse charities and subsidiary
gifts, formerly under the administration of the churchwardens, are regulated by schemes of the Charity
Commissioners 1883 and 1898, and are divided
thus:—

1. The Church Estate, the earliest records of
which are set out in an Inquisition of Charitable
Uses taken at Newbury on 18 April 1600.

The trust property now consists of houses and
land containing about 10½ a., bringing in a gross
rental of about £240 a year, £500 consols as a permanent repair fund, and £316 1s. 11d. consols, producing together £20 8s. yearly. The funds are held
by the official trustees, who also hold £1,686 3s. 11d.
consols on investment accounts for replacement of
capital expended on the trust properties.

The trustees are to pay yearly out of the income
£2 to the churchwardens of Wantage, £1 2s. 8d. to
the rector of Newbury for sermons on certain days,
and 2s. each to the clerk and sexton, and the net
yearly income is to be applied primarily in the payment to the churchwardens of the parish church of
any charges lawfully incurred by them in the maintenance and repair of the fabric of the church, and,
subject thereto, in the maintenance of the services
and furniture of the church.

2. Charity of John Childs, founded by will proved
in the P.C.C. 6 March 1840, which came into full
operation on the death, in 1863, of Martha Skinner,
testator's niece. The endowment now consists of a
house, spirit store and outbuildings in the marketplace, let at £100 a year, and £894 14s. 8d. consols
with the official trustees, producing £22 7s. 4d.
yearly.

By clause 30 of the principal scheme a sum of £7
a year is payable to the rector of Newbury for
sermons or instruction in religion in the parish
church. The trustees are also to pay out of the
income from 5s. 6d. to 7s. 6d. weekly to three men
members of the Church of England appointed to
Child's Almshouses.

The inmates are also entitled to a share of the
charity of Richard Dangerfield. (See below.)

3. The Church Almshouses and Gifts and Bread
Charities, which include the gifts of Griffith Curteys,
deed, 1583, and of John Hunt, deed, 1623; the
gifts of John Howes, deed, 1676; Maurice Hore,
will, 1523, and Hugh Hawkins; John Seeley, will,
1677; Anthony Cooke, will, 1717; John Giles,
will proved in 1721; Hannah Aldworth, will, 1775;
Richard Dixon, deed, 1607; Henry Hobbes, deed,
1625; John Cooke the elder, will, 1661; and gifts
of unknown donors.

The endowments consist of fifteen almshouses (including three almshouses in respect of Child's Charity),
erected at a cost of £2,500 on the east side of Newtown Road, in hand; houses and 20 a. of land or
thereabouts, bringing in a gross rental of about £130
a year, and £77 11s. 8d. fixed payments out of real
estate, also £1,246 9s. 6d. consols (including £104
stock, redemption in 1904 of a rent-charge of £2 12s.
belonging to Henry Hobbes's Charity), and £40
2½ per cent. annuities, redemption in 1891 of a
rent-charge of £1 charged upon Canal Wharf (John
Cooke, junior's, Charity), producing £32 3s. yearly.
By the scheme the trustees are entitled to pay from
5s. 6d. to 7s. 6d. to each of the almspeople and an
allowance for coal, the surplus income (if any) being
applicable for the general benefit of the necessitous
poor.

The sums of stock are held by the official trustees,
who also hold a further sum of £440 consols derived
under the will of John James, proved in the P.C.C.
20 February 1769, the annual dividends of which,
amounting to £11, are carried to the account of the
Almshouse Charities and paid to the rector. (See
also under Kimber's Almshouses, above.)

The charities administered by the Weavers' Company of Newbury, incorporated by a charter of
14 Elizabeth, include:—

1. Richard Dixon's Charity, founded by will
dated in 1624, consisting of a house known as
24 Cheap Street, let at £14 a year, acquired on the
opening of New Market Street, in 1872, by exchange
for the messuage originally devised. The sum of 6s. 8d.
is paid to the rector of Newbury for a sermon on the
feast day and 6s. 8d. towards the feast of the Weavers'
Company, £6 to the rector and churchwardens and
£6 to the wardens of the company for distribution
among old men and widows.

2. Charity of William Deale (date not stated),
formerly consisting of the 'Weavers' Arms' in Cheap
Street, which was sold in 1897 to the South Berks
Brewery Company in consideration of the transfer of
£800 4½ per cent. debenture stock of that company.
The annual dividends, amounting to £36, are applied
in the distribution of a great-coat of the value of
£2 10s. and a Christmas gift of £1 15s. to each
freeman, and the residue is applied for the general
purposes of the company.

3. The almshouses founded by will of Benjamin
Robinson, dated in 1754, for three poor weavers,
with a preference to such as were related to the
testator's family, now consist of three cottages in
Northcroft Lane, held on lease from the governors
of St. Bartholomew's Hospital, the almshouses in
St. Bartholomew Street, originally devised, having
been sold. The endowments consist of £600 Newbury Corporation 3½ per cent. mortgage held by the
official trustees, who also hold £637 6s. 1d. consols,
representing a legacy of £500, with accumulations,
by will of John Childs, proved in the P.C.C. 6 March
1840, producing together £38 7s. in yearly dividends.
A rent of £10 a year is paid for the almshouses.

There are now no 'poor' weavers in Newbury, and
only one of the cottages is occupied by an almsman,
the other two being let at 1s. 6d. a week each. At
the close of 1909 there was a balance in hand of
£70. (See also under Kimber's Almshouses, above.)

The charity of Margaret Cross, founded by deed in
1613, and others are now represented by £191 2s.
consols with the official trustees, the annual dividends
of which, amounting to £4 15s. 4d., are expended
among poor widows in tickets for clothing of the
value of 10s. each.

In 1736 Thomas Stockwell, by deed, granted an
annuity of 30s. for distribution among the poor on
St. Thomas's Day, charged upon certain premises
which were demolished to make room for the present
town hall. A sum of 30s. is distributed annually by
the mayor in half-crowns.

Charities of Richard Cowslade, founded by deed
(enrolled), dated respectively 13 May and 27 June
1715.

1. For the education and apprenticing of ten poor
boys attending at the corporation school, then called
the Blue School.

2. For the organist of the parish church.

The endowments of the two charities have been
merged and now consist of 37 a., or thereabouts,
at Greenham, let at £53 a year; two rent-charges
of £40 and £20 issuing from Waterman's Farm at
Holt in Kintbury; £596 os. 8d. consols with the
official trustees and £150 on deposit at a bank.
The gross yearly income, amounting to £130 18s.,
is subject to deductions of about £12 a year for
rectorial and vicarial tithes and for land tax on the
Greenham property.

The organist is paid £30 a year, and about £5 a
year is expended on repairs of the organ and £5
a year to the mayor's feast, and the remainder of the
net income is applied for schooling, clothing and
apprenticing ten boys, who are educated at the
National school.

Richard Dangerfield, by his will dated in 1826,
bequeathed £400 sterling, the income to be divided
equally among twelve almspeople in the Church
Almshouses, also a further sum of £1,500 stock (subject to certain life interests) to be apportioned as to
£300 stock between the almspeople in Coxedd's
and Pearce's Almshouses, as to £600 stock for the
relief of poor persons belonging to the Society of
Protestant Dissenters called 'Independents,' as to
£300 stock for poor of Methodist chapel, and to
£300 residue of such stock for poor of Baptist
chapel.

The above-mentioned legacies are now represented
by £1,785 6s. 2d. consols, standing in the names
of David Rogers Jones and two others, producing
£44 12s. 8d. annually.

The sum of £3 is retained by the trustees for
expenses of management, and in 1909 £8 14s. was
distributed equally among twelve inmates of the
Church and Child's Almshouses, £6 10s. 8d. among
four inmates of Coxedd's Almshouses, and the remaining income among the poor of the Dissenting congregations. (See Nonconformist Charities below.)

In 1847 Mrs. Sarah Page, by her will proved in
the P.C.C., bequeathed £333 6s. 8d. consols, the
annual dividends of which, amounting to £8 6s. 8d.,
are carried to the general funds of the boys' and
girls' Lancastrian schools in equal shares. In case
of the discontinuance of either or both such schools,
the stock undisposed of is directed to be carried to
the endowment of St. Mary's Schools, Speenhamland.
The stock is standing in the names of three of the
managers of the schools.

In 1889 William Pollett Brown Chatteris, by his
will proved at London, bequeathed to the rector
and churchwardens £1,000, now represented by
£1,007 9s. 9d. consols with the official trustees, the
annual dividends, amounting to £25 3s. 8d., to be
received by the rector as a compensation for the loss
sustained by the endowment of the district church of
St. John out of the income of the rectory.

The Literary and Scientific Institution, Northbrook Street, originally founded in 1861, was by a
deed of 28 March 1905 demised by the corporation
to the county council of Berks, at the yearly rent
of £100. The premises are now used as a secondary
school for girls.

Nonconformist Charities:—The Upper Meeting
House (Unitarian), comprised in deed of 21 August
1839, is endowed with a sum of £1,273 1s. consols,
held by the official trustees, arising from gifts and
legacies by various donors, including a gift in 1771
of £300 stock by Mrs. Osgood, a legacy in 1783 of
£100 stock by Mrs. Powers, of £100 by Mrs. Gosling
and of £400 stock in 1811 by will of Mr. Brice
Bunny; also with a rent-charge of £2 2s. issuing
out of a house in Bartholomew Street, the gift of a
William Archet or Orchard (date unknown). The
income, amounting to £33 18s. 4d., is, subject to
the repairs of the chapel, applied towards the
minister's stipend.

In 1909 the sum of £13 1s. 6d. was distributed
among the poor of the Independent church as their
share of the charity of Richard Dangerfield (see
above); also the sum of £6 10s. 9d. was likewise
distributed among the poor members of the Wesleyan
Methodists in respect of the same charity.

The Baptist chapel is possessed of £297 1s. 3d.
consols, representing a legacy of £200 by will of
Benjamin Tomkins, proved in the P.C.C. 15 March
1736, and a legacy in 1808 by will of Elizabeth
Tomkins; also £139 8s. consols, arising under will
of Joseph Tomkins, proved in the P.C.C. 1 March
1754. The sums of stock are standing in the names
of four of the trustees; the annual dividends, amounting together to £10 18s., are paid towards the stipend
of the minister. The minister also receives a further
sum of £7 4s., being the dividends at 4 per cent. on
a sum of £180 lent on mortgage, representing a
legacy of £200 less duty, by will of Samuel Coxeter,
proved at Oxford 21 October 1893.

The said Samuel Coxeter also bequeathed £100,
the interest to be applied in augmentation of the
salary of the colporteur employed by the Baptist
church at Newbury. The legacy is secured by a
bond of the corporation at 3½ per cent., the interest
of £3 10s. being used in mission work in village
chapels in connexion with the Baptist church.

In 1909 a sum of £6 10s. 9d. was distributed
among the poor members of the Baptist church as
their share of the charity of Richard Dangerfield
(see above).

Charities for Public Uses.—An allotment for
recreation ground, containing 4 a., now known as the
City Playground, was acquired in 1849 under the
East and West Fields Inclosure Award, and is vested in
the corporation, by whom it is maintained. An
allotment of 25 p., formerly called 'The Sandpits,'
under the same inclosure, also vested in the corporation, is said to be the scene of the burning of the
'Newbury Martyrs' in 1556.

An allotment for labouring poor, acquired in 1857
under the Wash Common award, containing about
4 a., is let in allotments containing 40 p. each at 5s.
a plot, making £3 15s. a year, which, subject to the
payment of a rent-charge of £2, is deposited in the
savings bank as a fund for the repair of the fences, &c.

A further allotment for a recreation ground was
awarded under the same inclosure containing about
6 a. on the border of Enborne parish. There are
several burial-mounds within its area marking the
graves of soldiers who fell in the first battle of
Newbury in 1643.

By a deed dated 5 March 1885 the land was
vested in the corporation.

Ecclesiastical District of St. John.—The mission
room, &c., comprised in deed of 14 August 1895 is
endowed with two pieces of land at Greenham East
Fields, with sheds thereon, let at £20 a year, which
is applied towards the salary of the lay reader.

In 1889 William Pollett Brown Chatteris, by a
codicil to his will proved at London, bequeathed
£200, now represented by £202 4s. 11d. consols,
the annual dividends whereof, amounting to £5 1s.,
are applicable for the benefit of the mission church at
Wash Common.

In 1898 Miss Jane Deane, by her will proved at
Oxford, bequeathed a moiety of her residuary estate,
the income thereof to be applied for the benefit of
poor, sick and needy persons.

Miss Anne Deane, sister of the said testatrix, by
her will proved at the same date and place, likewise
bequeathed a moiety of her residuary estate. The two
bequests are represented by a sum of £411 11s. 10d.
India 3 per cent. stock, producing £12 6s. 8d. yearly,
which is carried to the parish sick and needy fund.

The sums of stock are held by the official trustees.

By a scheme of the Board of Education of 24 October
1911, made in the matter of Christ's Hospital, gifts
of (1) John and Frances West and (2) Frances West,
it was provided that there should always be on the
foundation of Christ's Hospital not less than thirtysix children to be called the Newbury probationers,
who should be entitled to receive education, maintenance and clothes free of charge, the same provision
being also made for the borough of Reading.

The boroughs of Newbury and Reading likewise
participate in the benefits of the charity by the same
donors for poor blind persons. The charity is regulated by a scheme of the Charity Commissioners of
19 January 1911, and is under the administration of
the Clothworkers' Company, London.

Footnotes

1. There is said to be an old fireplace
inside on the first floor, but the storage
of furniture prevents its being seen. Some
of the moulded beams of the ground floor
ceiling are visible.

14. Confirmation by William the
Conqueror in Round, Cal. of Doc. France,
108. A later confirmation declares that
the grant was in the time of William
Rufus (Salisbury Chart. and Doc. [Rolls
Ser.], 87).

57. So strong was the feeling of the
ourgesses of Newbury against their
neighbours at Reading that in the reign
of Henry III they tried to make them
pay market dues in Newbury from which
they were by charter notoriously free. The
Newbury leaders were the bailiffs Nicholas
of Newbury, Thomas Reeve (prepositus)
and John Goldsmith, but when the
Reading burgesses appealed to the law their
opponents promptly gave way, declaring
that they never before had heard of these
royal charters (Assize R. 40, m. 14 d.).

61. The use and disuse of the words
'burgus' and 'villa' for the same place
is rather confusing. In the early 13th
century places where burgage tenure
existed are correctly spoken of as
boroughs, and at least ten are allotted
to Berkshire (Assize R. 36, m. 1 d.
[9 Hen. III]), but even on the same
roll they may be described as 'villae.'

80. The few remaining borough accounts
for the 15th century contain interesting
details illustrating the business side of
mediaeval Newbury. In 1450–1 we
hear of John Goldsmith, butcher, paying
2d. yearly for 4 ft. of land of the lord's
waste by his threshold (versus hostium
tenementi sui), evidently for exposing his
meat for sale, on a hundred years' lease
(Mins. Accts. bdle. 1115, no. 1). Henry
Wormestall, again, a wealthy and pious
citizen, the founder of a chantry, had
long paid rent for a very small parcel
of land in Northbrook Street where a
pair of traves was erected, and Thomas
Abbott had a shambles in the market
opposite his house. Not only Newbury
residents held stallages in the market,
for the deeds of St. Bartholomew's Hospital show us that this foundation leased
places to Hungerford dealers in hardware nearly three-quarters of a century
before (Aug. Off. Misc. Bks. cxxi, 22).
Late in the reign of Henry VI (36
& 37 Hen. VI), possibly after a period
of some disturbance—for the arrears
are £11 13s. 8d.—we still find trade
stirring (Mins. Accts. bdle. 750, no. 5).
Fulling-mills are mentioned, and William
Benet, of a well-known Newbury family,
was apparently erecting, or about to erect,
a new one of two 'chipes,' while in the
market we hear of the activities of the
proctors (procuratores) of the gild (fraternitas) of St. George, and of the box that
held the market toll.

99. See extracts from Episcopal Registers
at Salisbury quoted by Money, op. cit.
162 et seq. In 1390 a grant of pontage
was made to the bailiffs and good men
of Newbury (Pat. 14 Ric. II, pt. i,
m. 20). The bailiffs in early deeds were
sometimes more than two in number,
and the name may have included the
constables (see Money, op. cit. 176).

100. Ct. R. (Gen. Ser.), portf. 154, no. 49.
For a 15th-century gild of St. George
see advowson.

114. Money, op. cit. 190; S. P. Dom.
Eliz. xxxv, 44. John More and Gabriel
Coxe are both mentioned as associated
with Kystell in the government of St.
Bartholomew's.

115. The steward was afterwards known
as the high steward and had a deputy
who was the recorder.

116. Chart. 38 Eliz. (Newbury Munic.
MSS.). The market toll was apparently
reserved to the Crown, and Anne of
Denmark seems to have resumed the
rights to piccage and stallage, since she
granted them to Gabriel Cox and others
in 1605 (Money, op. cit. 234).

178. MS. Hist. of the Newbury Presbyterians, 8, 9. The above MS., which
contains many curious details and traditions of the Dissenters in Newbury, was
lent to the writer by the kindness of
Mr. T. N. Stillman.

269. Probably the same Gervase, parson
of the church of Newbury, who in some
litigation in the Curia Regis in 1199 stated
that his patron (advocatus) was Philip de
Colombiéres, formerly husband of Maud
or Mabel de Candos. Possibly the alien
priory had leased the advowson (Palgrave,
Rot. Cur. Reg. [Rec. Com.], i, 252).